, ex-BMSA, USN
ND07-00021

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:  				20061003
	Characterization of Service:		
	Reason for Discharge:			  
	Discharge Authority:			MILPERSMAN 1910-142
	Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge:	USS WASP (LHD-1)

Applicant’s Request:	
	Characterization change to:		
	Narrative Reason change to: 		
	Review Requested:			
	
Representation:					
	
Applicant’s issues: 
1. Veteran’s Administration benefits
2.  Re-entry into U.S. Navy  
3.  In Service - Equity	
4.  Falsely accused of larceny

Decision:

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .	
By a vote of  the Reason for Discharge shall  .

Date of Decision:					20070816
Location of Board:				Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:				
Complete Medical Record:			
Complete Discharge Package:			

Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:	
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:	

Issue(s) 1 - 2:  The Board determined that these issues are not issues which can form the basis for relief for the Applicant or that the board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .  

Issue 3 ().  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by 3 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles  92 (violation of a lawful order) and 121 ( Larceny) of the UCMJ.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.    

Issue 4 ().  The Applicant implies that he was falsely accused of larceny.  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.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the claim that he was falsely accused of larceny.  The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.    

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.  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.

Summary of Service:

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)				19990818 - 19991017  
Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  				19991018
Years Contracted:  				; Extension:  
Date of Discharge:				20030331
Length of Service
	Active:					03  Yrs  05  Mths  14  Dys  (does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:					00  Yrs  00  Mths  00  Dys
	Time Lost During This Period:		

Education Level:  				
Age at this Enlistment:  				
AFQT:  						69
Highest Rate/Rank:				BMSN

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
				Performance: 2.3(3) Behavior: 2.5(4) OTA: 2.38

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214):  MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION; SEA SERVICE RIBBON; BATTLE 'E' RIBBON

Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Reason for Discharge

20011207:	NJP.  No further information found in service record.
	No indication of appeal in the record.  [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070-/604, Awards.]

20020626:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 121:  Larceny.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $692.00 for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, remove recommendation for pay grade E-4.
	No indication of appeal in the record.

20030110:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 92 (2 specifications):  Violations of a lawful order of unlawfully using shipyard access card.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $645.00 for 2 months, restriction for 30 days, reduction to E-2.
	No indication of appeal in the record.

20030331:	Applicant released from active duty under other than honorable conditions due to a commission of a serious offense.  [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/613, Administrative Remarks.]

Elements of Discharge:  [INVOLUNTARY]

Date Notified:					NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Reason for Discharge				
Least Favorable Characterization Authorized:	

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:		NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel			
Obtain Copies of Documents		
Submit Statement(s) (date)			      
Administrative Board			
GCMCA Review				

Administrative Board Date:			NOT FOUND IN RECORD     
	Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:	NOT FOUND IN RECORD
	Recommendation on Separation: 		NOT FOUND IN RECORD
	Recommendation on Characterization:	NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):	
Separation Authority (date):	NOT FOUND IN RECORD
	Reason for discharge directed:		
	Characterization directed:			NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Date Applicant Discharged:			20030331

Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Total Number of Pages:				65
       
Related to Period of Service Under Review:
	From Service and/or Medical Record:		Other Records:	

Related to Other Period(s) of Service:
	From Service and/or Medical Record:		Other Records:	
       
Related to Post-Service Period:
	Employment:					Finances:	
	Health/Medical Records:				Substance Abuse:	
	Family/Personal Status:				Education:	
 	Community Service Efforts:			References:	
	Criminal Records:			

Other:
	Additional Statements From Applicant:		From Representative:	
        	Other Documentation (Describe)		      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 
25 January 2004, 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 92 (violation of a lawful order) and 121 ( Larceny).

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe that 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.  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:  Subsequent to a document review, 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.  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 Veterans Administration 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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board 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 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, 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 “PTSD.”  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.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 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.  

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the 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