Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100717

Original file (ND1100717.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MN2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110124

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)        20020928 - 20030 6 22     Active:          20030 6 23 - 20070921

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070922     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090527      Highest Rank/Rate: MN2
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 6 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 31
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.05

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol (2) ESWS

Periods of UA /C ONF :             DISCHARGED IN ABSENTIA

NJP :     S CM :             SPCM:             Retention Warning Counseling :

C C :

- Unknown :        Offense: 4 Counts of a ggravated sexual assualt of a child [Extracted from Evaluation & Report Counseling Record dated 20090520]
         Sentence : 40 years in Texas State Prison
         Dismissed on 20090605

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, NAVY GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, NAVY AND MARINE CORPSACHIEVEMENT MEDAL (2), ENLIST ED SURFACE WARFARE SPECIALIST, LETTER OF APPRECIATION, LETTER OF COMMENDATION , NAVY PISTOL MARKSMAN RIBBON ”
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 030623 UNTIL 070921 ”
         “ MILPERSMAN 1910-142 ”

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:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, 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 s 128 and 134 .

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

Applicant’s Issues
1.        The Applicant desires to re-enlist in the military.
2.       The Applicant contends he was falsely accused and his conviction was overturned.
3.       The Applicant contends he was never notified of administrative separation.

Decision
Date : 2012 0412             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 discharg e 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 included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and no misconduct resulting in non-judicial punishment or court-martial. The Applicant was convicted in a civil court of four counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child. Based on the , command administratively processed for separation . The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to re-enlist in the military. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was falsely accused and his conviction was overturned. The Applicant submitted court documents showing his case was dismissed in civil court due to the victim’s family refusing to cooperate with the prosecution. The Applicant was separated from the Navy due to a preponderance of the evidence that he committed the crimes based upon his arrest and initial conviction of the crimes . While the Applicant was granted a second trial, which was dismissed due to the victim’s family refusing to cooperate further with prosecutors, the initial conviction substantiates a preponderance of the evidence that the Applicant committed the offenses . This was sufficient for the Applicant to be administratively processed for separation. Therefore, the NDRB determined the separation was proper and equit able. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was never notified of administrative separation. The record did not contain the Applicant’s separation package. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless substantial evidence is presented to overcome that presumption. The Applicant submitted no documentation or evidence to support this issue. Per Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE , processing for separation is mandatory for “ 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). ” The Applicant met this requirement for mandatory processing for separation. Therefore, an upgrade based on this issue would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall . 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 | 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201068

Original file (MD1201068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Clemency denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900460

Original file (ND0900460.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he provided several character references as evidence on his behalf. After a thorough...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001158

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

Documentation submitted by the Applicant indicates the case was only dismissed. ” 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 opportunities.
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500011

Original file (MD1500011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101304

Original file (ND1101304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB voted to upgrade the Applicant’s discharge to Honorable and to change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, facts, and circumstances unique to this case,and taking into consideration his testimony,the Board found the discharge was inequitable. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801032

Original file (ND0801032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe): DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500034

Original file (ND1500034.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. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process, the Board found However, after...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100744

Original file (ND1100744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20001117 - 20010723Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010724Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040609Highest Rank/Rate:GSE3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 17 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 35EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(2)Behavior:3.0(2)OTA: 3.43Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100698

Original file (ND1100698.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable as it was based on an isolated incident in 14 years of service with no other adverse actions.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100717

Similar Decisions