ex-YNSR, USN

                  Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090312
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:  Characterization change to:
                   Narrative Reason change to:

                             Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:   USNR (DEP) 20040831 - 20040908   Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20040909     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20050504 Highest Rank/Rate:  YNSR
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   26 Day(s)
Education Level:       AFQT:  46
Evaluation Marks:      Performance:  1.0 (2) Behavior:  1.0 (2)     OTA:
1.08

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:
    - 20050415:  Article 86 (Unauthorized absence)
      Article 107 (False official statement)
      Article 134 (Debt, dishonorably failing to pay)
            Awarded:     Suspended:


SCM:            SPCM:

CC:  1 [Civilian action pending for unknown charge(s) and were adjudicated
      after discharge]
            Sentence: conviction/fine (unverified) per Applicant’s
      statement

Retention Warning Counseling:


                    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
                                         DD 214:    Service/Medical Record:
              Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
      Employment:                 Finances:
Education/Training:
      Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:
Criminal Records:
      Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:
References:
              Additional Statements:
                             From Applicant:       From Representation:
      From Congress member:
                    Other Documentation:

                          Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective
26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF
MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval
Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211,
Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503,
Equity.

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive
discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special
or general court-martial for violation of UCMJ Article 107 (False official
statement) and Article 134 (Debt, dishonorably failing to pay).

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                     NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
                    DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

                             Applicant’s Issues
1.  Reenlistment opportunities
2.  Applicant claims she took the fall for misconduct alone, although
others were involved.
3.  Post-service conduct

                                  Decision

Date:  20090820         Location:  Washington D.C. Representation:

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  MISCONDUCT.

                                 Discussion
The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of
an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service
and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  In reviewing
discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government
affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the
presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The
Applicant’s record of service is reflected by one non-judicial punishment
(NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 86
(unauthorized absence), Article 107 (false official statement) and Article
134 (debt, dishonorably failing to pay).  In addition, the Applicant was
required to appear in civilian court for charges unknown to the Board.  For
the Applicant’s edification, separation due to the commission of a serious
offense does not require a civilian conviction; however, the offense must
be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence.  It’s the Board’s opinion
that the charges preferred in a civilian court were egregious enough to
warrant an administrative separation from the Navy in order to maintain
proper order and discipline.  The Applicant’s discharge package was
unavailable, thus it is the presumption of the Board that the separation
process was conducted properly within Navy regulations.

: (Non-decisional)  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment,
reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the
Armed Forces, nor is the NDRB authorized to change a reenlistment code.
Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to
reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a
discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  An
unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request
for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application
for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review
to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends she got mixed up with the
wrong crowd and was singly penalized for the misconduct that led to her
discharge and the loss of trust in her by those within her chain of
command.  The Applicant claims that during her non-judicial punishment, she
knowingly failed to identify others involved in misconduct because she
believed she was protecting them.  It is the Board’s opinion that her
actions in this area compromised her integrity and dignity, which are
essential to a successful Navy enlistment.  Relief denied.

Issue 3:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant claims she is staying out of
trouble and is continuing her education.  The Applicant failed to provide
any documentary evidence on her behalf for post-service consideration
despite a recommendation to do so by the NDRB.  The Applicant could have
produced evidence as stated per the addendum, with the full understanding
completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade.  Relief
denied.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the
Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, discharge process
and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found
By a majority vote of 4-1, the Board determined the characterization of
service received, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, and the narrative
reason for the discharge, Misconduct, shall remain as issued considering
the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved.  The Applicant
remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen
years from the date of her discharge.  The Applicant is directed to the
Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Reenlistment/RE-code and Post-
Service Conduct.

                  ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe the decision in your case is unclear,
not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with
the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may
submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to
the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon,
Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the
Instruction before submitting such a complaint.  The complaint procedure
does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed
solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements
for clarity and responsiveness.  You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and
other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil.”

Additional Reviews:  After a document review has been conducted, former
members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the
application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of
discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims
of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this
discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended
but not required.  There are veteran's organizations, such as the American
Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans, willing to provide
guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge
upgrade.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years,
has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise
exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC
20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The U.S Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines
eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review
Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization
solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not
serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade
a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational
opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of
the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code:  Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over
reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any
other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a
reenlistment code.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR)
can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the NDRB has no
authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing
reenlistment opportunities.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a
bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the
processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct:  DoD disability regulations do not
preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that
separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for
other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical
Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative
involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct,
the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case
remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.
If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for
misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is
authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated
health record.  Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to
change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical
disability or other medical related reasons.  Only the Board for Correction
of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an
unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time
or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service.

Post-Service Conduct:  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service
factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service
conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough
understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period
of service under review, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation
to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to:
a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth
certificate (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of
community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil
authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing
from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions;
attendance or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and
documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that
completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an
unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-
by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate
previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the
member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD) – Because relevant and
material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the
NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence
of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.
With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action
of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an
act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  The
NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or
dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the NDRB Board are
recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the
service records by writing to:

                         Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                         Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
                         720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                         Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023