Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400099
Original file (ND1400099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ET1, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20131025
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)        19990316 - 19990727     Active:   19990728 - 20030717 HON
                                    20030718 - 20080714 HON
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080715     Age at Enlistment: 40
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20110714      Highest Rank/Rate: ET1 (SW)
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 99
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 4.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.78

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (3) (3) (2) (3) (3) MOVSM (3) (7) FLoC

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :             S CM :   SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20101208 :       Charges: 2 felony counts of child molestation, 1 felony count of ag g ravated child molestation

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 990728 UNTIL 080714 ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, PERS-312A, 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 :        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends he was falsely accused of misconduct by his ex-wife.
2.       The Applicant contends he served honorably for 12 years.
3.       The A pplicant contends he was not discharged prior to his End of Active Obligated Service (EAOS).
Decision

Date : 20 1 4 0515             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 . T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propri ety. The Applicant’s record of service in his current enlistment included a civilian arrest for two felony charges of child molestation and one felony charge of aggravated child molestation. Based on the civilian arrest of the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written letter, and request an administrative board . On 1 June 2011, an a dministrative b oard convened and determined by a 3-0 vote that a preponderance of evidence supported the Applicant’s commission of a serious offense, and the b oard voted 3-0 to recommend to the Separation Authority that the Applicant be administratively separated Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The Separation Authority concurred with the board’s findings and discharged the Applicant on 1 4 July 2011.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was falsely accused of misconduct by his ex-wife. The Applicant was arrested by civilian authorities for child molestation after his wife made a complaint. The police investigation substantiated allegations of child molestation against the Applicant, and he was ordered to trial in civilian court. While the Applicant was waiting for his civilian court date, he was processed by his Navy command for administrative separation. An a dministrative b oard convened and determined by a unanimous vote that the preponderance of evidence supported the allegations and determined by a unanimous vote to recommend separation from the Navy Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The Separation Authority agreed with the finding s and recommendation s of the b oard, and the Applicant was discharged on 14 July 2011. The Applicant was pro vided full due process during the separation proceedings. The Applicant did not provide any evidence to the NDRB that refuted the b oard’s findings or proved that his ex-wife had made false allegations against him. After the Applicant’s discharge from the Navy, he was found guilty in civilian court on two counts of felony child molestation and sentenced to 15 years in prison for each co nviction . The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Relief denied.

Issues 2-3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he served honorably for 12 years. He also contends he was not discharged prior to his EAOS. The Applicant submitted numerous character references from his administrative separation board. The Applicant first enlisted in the Navy on 28 July 1999 and served honorably until his reenlistment on 18 July 2003. The Applicant served honorably during his second enlistment until 14 July 2008. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. The Applicant began his third enlistment on 15 July 20 08 until he was administratively separated on 14 July 2011 Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. To reach one’s EAOS, however, a servicemember must reach 2359 on the last day of his contract. The Applicant was discharged on the last day of his contract but before 235 9 , therefore, the NDRB determined he was properly and equitably discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Serious Offense). 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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until 17 August 2011, 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.


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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00482

    Original file (ND03-00482.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.940413 Applicant plead guilty to felony injury of a child.940607: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and civilian...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500229

    Original file (MD1500229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, arrest for annoying and molesting a child, and civilian conviction for indecent exposure to a minor. ” 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...

  • 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02500-98

    Original file (02500-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2500-98 14 April 1999 Dears This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United \ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. also married with two daughters, ages 18...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500960

    Original file (ND1500960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Separating Authority approved the Administrative Board’s recommendation to separate the Applicant and directed the Applicant be separated with Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01176

    Original file (ND01-01176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My conviction was a civil, non military offense. 871203: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a civil conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was...

  • 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-01010

    Original file (ND00-01010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When I was later incarcerated by civilian authorities TRITRAFAC took administrative action for my being "Absent Without Leave", a situation that existed only because TRITRAFAC had cancelled my retirement. Applicant released without bond.960403: Authorization for applicant's transfer to the Fleet Reserve, under ther Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) Program has been cancelled by Chief of Naval Personnel (PERS-27).960525: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 25May96.960528: Civil...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300773

    Original file (ND1300773.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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301597

    Original file (ND1301597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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 remain .The Applicant failed to appear at his personal appearance hearing, therefore, he is not eligible for further...