Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500367
Original file (ND1500367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GM, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20141203
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)       19850910 - 19851105      Active:  19985106-19890719 USN HON
                                    19890720-19980225 USN HON       
19980226-20001119 USN HON
20001120-20031117 USN HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Current Enlistment: 20031118         Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050408      Highest Rank/Rate: GM      
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 22 Day(s)
Education Level:         AFQT: 37     
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 2.00 (1)    Behavior: 2.00 (1)       OTA: NOB

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle Pistol (2) JMUA (3) (2) (2) CGOSR

Periods of UA/CONF: NFIR

NJP: SCM: SPCM:

CIVIL ARREST:

CC:

- 20030217:      Offense: Pled guilty for violation of Penal Code Section 261.5(d) Count 3, (unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor under 16 years of age) a felony.
             Sentence: On 18 May 2004 Applicant was placed on formal probation for three years under the custody of the Sheriff suspended for 365 days (with credit for two days of custody), 200 hours of community service, and to pay a fine of $239.00 and restitution fine of $200.00 to be payable at $25.00 per month.

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 19851106 UNTIL 20031118”

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 28 April 2005, Article 1910-144, Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.

B. 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.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.



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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends the administrative board did not follow procedure; victim admitted to lying at hearing; committed
perjury about her age.

2. The Applicant contends that his 19 years, 5 months, and 3 days of service was not given due consideration and he was given
an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge unfairly.

Decision

Date: 20150225            Location: Washington D.C.        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 evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included one Civil Conviction in that the Applicant Pled guilty for violation of Penal Code Section 261.5(d) Count 3, (unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor under 16 years of age) a felony. Based on the offense committed by 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 statement, and request an administrative board. The Administrative Board recommended, by a vote of 3 to 0 separation by reason of misconduct due to Civilian Conviction and the characterization be Under Other Than Honorable.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends the administrative board did not follow procedure; victim admitted to lying at hearing; committed perjury about her age. A servicemember may be processed for separation for the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the offense or a closely related offense is a violation of the UCMJ and warrants a punitive discharge in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial. There is no requirement for adjudication by judicial or non-judicial proceedings, but the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of the evidence. In accordance with the pertinent regulation and or laws listed above, all civilian convictions (federal, state, and local) including deferred prosecutions are binding on issue of whether misconduct has occurred and administrative discharge board is required to find that misconduct did occur. Therefore the NDRB finds that the Administrative Separations Board was proper in substantiating the misconduct. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends that his 19 years, 5 months, and 3 days of service was not given due consideration and he was given an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge unfairly. Servicemembers may be separated based on civilian convictions, or actions tantamount to findings of guilt, when the same or closely related offense would warrant a punitive discharge per the Manual for Courts-Martial. Unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor under 16 years of age, the offense for which the Applicant was convicted in a civilian court, is covered under Article 120 of the UCMJ, and would warrant an unfavorable discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. Based on the civilian conviction, his command chose not to pursue a punitive discharge or confinement under the UCMJ, but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

The Applicant’s DD214 was incorrect in that it did not identify the periods of continuous honorable service. Additionally, the
VA determines the eligibility for enrollment in its programs - independent of the Applicant’s characterization of service as
determined by the Navy. The Applicant is encouraged to contact his local VA affairs representative for more information and
may request a review of service and determination of benefits from the VA.

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. 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), 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901660

    Original file (ND0901660.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His discharge was in error.3. Based on the Applicant’s civilian conviction, his command administratively processed him 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201726

    Original file (ND1201726.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his charges were reduced and 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...

  • 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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201672

    Original file (ND1201672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101620

    Original file (ND1101620.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100886

    Original file (ND1100886.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his honorable 19 years of service outweigh his misconduct. Representation: NONE 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801669

    Original file (ND0801669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20000619 - 20010524Active: USNR (DEP20001091 - 20011028 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20011029Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20060811Length of Service: Years Months13 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 55Highest Rank/Rate:EO3EvaluationMarks:Performance:1.0 Behavior:4.0OTA: 1.72Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801951

    Original file (ND0801951.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT 1. 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 frequency 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.Summary: After a thorough review of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102136

    Original file (ND1102136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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 are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902312

    Original file (ND0902312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 evidence submitted by the Applicant.The Applicant’s record of...