Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001158

Original file (ND1001158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-QM2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100407

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:         US N R (DEP)        20000825 - 20001015     Active: 20001016 - 20060211 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060212     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20071207      Highest Rank/Rate: QM2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 25 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol CGSOSR

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    CC: NONE          Retention Warning Counseling:

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 001016 UNTIL 060211 ”
         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ MISCONDUCT (SEXUAL PERVERSION) ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation:          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:          From/To Representation:          From/To Congress member:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008, 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 the UCMJ, Article 120, Aggravated Sexual Contact with a Child.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant contends he was f alsely accused of 2 ^nd degree child molestation. He further contends t he Navy discharged him prematurely , because it chose not to wait for the case to be adjudicated in civilian court, which eventually dismissed the case due to lack of prosecution.
2.       The Applicant contends his r ecord of service warrants consideration for his discharge to be upgraded to Honorable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 0609             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

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 g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . The Applicant’s record of service did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, non-judicial punishments, or trials by court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. However, the Applicant was arrested , but not convicted, by civilian authorities for two counts of molestation with a female minor . Based on the arrest, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant elected his right s to consult with a qualified counsel , submit a written statement, and request an administrative board . However, the Applicant subsequently withdrew his request for an admin board and acknowledged that he would receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was falsely accused of 2 ^nd degree child molestation. He further contends the Navy discharged him prematurely , because it chose not to wait for the case to be adjudicated in civilian court, which eventually dismissed the case due to lack of prosecution. Per Navy regulations , “deviant sexual behavior (lewd and lascivious acts; forcible heterosexual sodomy; indecent assault, acts, and/or exposure; or any child sexual abuse, possession of child pornography, or incestuous relationships)” requires mandatory processing for separation from the Navy. Such behavior involves serious offenses and, therefore, does not require adjudication by non-judicial or judicial proceedings; however, the offense s must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence (e.g., copy of police record or Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigation). The NDRB determined that the offense s w ere substantiated by a preponderance of evidence, specifically the polygraph examination report and the probable cause statement . Therefore, t he command handled this as an administrative matter instead of a judicial matter and administratively processed the Applicant for separation. The command was not required to wait for the case to be adjudicated in civilian court. Documentation submitted by the Applicant indicates the case was only dismissed . He submitted no documentation indicating that he was acquitted or found not guilty of the charges . T he Board determine d that an upgrade to Honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he served honorabl y for seven years . Despite a service member’s record of service, certain serious offenses, regardless of whether they are isolated or pending adjudication by a civilian court, may war rant separation prior to adjudication to minimize the potential of bringing discredit upon the Navy as well as to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant was arrested, but not convicted, for child molestation . Because child molestation is considered a serious offense, there is no requirement for it to be adjudicated by non-judicial or judicial proceedings if it can be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. The offense was substantiated by a preponderance of evidence, specifically the polygraph examination report and the probable cause statement . The NDRB determined that, despite the Applicant’s record of service, an upgrade to Honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

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 of the Applicant’s 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 veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are 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 their 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 NDRB. 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 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct 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 certificates (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 at 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 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

Similar Decisions

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200822

Original file (ND1200822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100994

Original file (ND1100994.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the preponderance of the evidence that the offenses were committed by the Applicant, her command administratively processed for separation. ” 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 of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701033

Original file (ND0701033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

However, after a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate in light of the nature and seriousness of the Applicant’s misconduct, and that the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient to convince the Board that an upgrade was appropriate at this time.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400099

Original file (ND1400099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00171

Original file (ND04-00171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. I had a good service record before the allegations & should speak highly as my personal integrity.”Applicant marked the box "I HAVE LISTED ADDITIONAL ISSUES AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS APPLICATION." ]000919: Applicant informed by Commanding Officer of Family Advocacy Program Case Review Committee’s determination of substantiation of child...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301064

Original file (ND1301064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was based on a civilian conviction that he served his time for, and he wants his military record to reflect his service. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800855

Original file (ND0800855.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The record reflects the Applicant was administratively processed for misconduct due to the commission of as serious offense and provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative separation board. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600927

Original file (ND0600927.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: Discharge Process: Date Notified:20050321Narrative Reason(s): Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20050323Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) - NO STATEMENT FOUND IN RECORDBoard Date: NOT APPLICABLEFinding of Administrative Board: Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00529

Original file (ND04-00529.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 970324: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and found that the Applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. 970521: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00692

Original file (ND04-00692.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The suspect agreed to speak to me about the allegations, the suspect stated that he was at the poolhall with the victim and followed her outside. 031031: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001158

Similar Decisions