Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700164
Original file (ND0700164.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AOAN, USN
ND07-00164
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20061127            Characterization :
Narrative Reason: PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT                                     Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-140

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Minor misconduct did not warrant discharge
                           2. Post-service conduct

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 071011             Location: Washington D.C.        Representative: American Legion

Discussion

Issue 1 ( ). The Board did not concur with the Applicant’s contention that his misconduct did not warrant discharge. Contrary to his claim of 2 minor incidents, the Board found that the record demonstrated repeated misconduct on the Applicant’s part despite consistent command efforts to rehabilitate him with positive incentives and, when those failed, corrective punishment. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy meets acceptable standards of conduct and performance, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 retention warnings and 3 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for at least 11 violations of Articles 86 of the UCMJ. The re is no evidence in the record to indicate that the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not have been held accountable. The Board noted that, while the Applicant’s service record did not contain a copy of the notice of administrative separation, the Commanding Officer’s letter of 20050815 referenced a notification using administrative discharge board procedures, the appropriate procedures in the Applicant’s case. The Board was satisfied that the presumption of regularity in the conduct of government affairs was supported by the available evidence in this case.

Issue 2 ( ). 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 the service. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge.

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, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20020130 - 20030128              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20030129      Years Contracted : ; Extension:                   Date of Discharge: 20050913
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 07 Mths 15 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 54          Highest Rank /Rate : AOAN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.5 ( 2 )       Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )                  OTA: 2.92
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, GWOT SERVICE MEDAL

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 20031121 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 - Unauthorized absence on 20031120.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 678.00 ) for ( 2 m onths); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 30 days) . FOP and RIR susp 6 months.

20031121 :        Retention Warning for NJP of this date .
20040108 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 (3 specs) - Unauthorized absence.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 665.70) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); CC U for ( 30 days) . RIR suspended for 6 months.

20040108 :        Retention Warning . No further information found in record.
         [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 20050815.]

20040109:        Applicant to correction custody .

20040116:        Applicant ’s punishment of CCU remitted this date due to closure of correctional custody facility .

20050516:        Applicant submitted statement to Commanding Officer regarding pending NJP .

 20050520 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 (10 specs – NDRB note: 3 specs indicate same time/date of offense ) - Unauthorized absence .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 773.85 ) for ( 2 months).
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20050815 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMCARSTRKGRU NINE ( 20050906 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20050913

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:             Other Documentation (Describe)

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 .


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 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700964

    Original file (MD0700964.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - Restr for (14 days).20060602: Applicant voluntarily waives his right to an Administrative Discharge Board.20060619: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Separation Physical Diagnosis: Fit For Separation. ” 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. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700192

    Original file (MD0700192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant claims his medical issues contributed to his misconduct and adverse discharge. (2) Wrongfully possess some amount of marijuana Article 112a: Wrongfully use marijuana.Date Applicant Submitted SILT request: 20051109 Consulted with or Waived Counsel: Acknowledged Understanding Elements: Acknowledged Guilt to: Article(s) 86 and 112a BCD/DD authorized for offense(s) Acknowledged Consequences of OTH: Type of Characterization Requested: Commanding Officer Recommendation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701093

    Original file (MD0701093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the circumstances that resulted in the characterization of discharge.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. 20050318: Vacate FOP for 1 month, Restr and Extra duties for 45 days awarded at NJP dated 20050116.20050331: MARCORSEPMAN 6105...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700453

    Original file (MD0700453.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense that he committed. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700795

    Original file (MD0700795.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19930528 - 19930811Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19930812Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19961107Length of Service: 03 Yrs 02Mths26 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 88MOS:2515Highest Rank: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700780

    Original file (ND0700780.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700700

    Original file (ND0700700.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700367

    Original file (ND0700367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 retention warnings, 6 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct towards a master chief petty officer), 92 (failure to obey written regulation), 95 (resistance), 112 (drunk on duty), 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance) and 134 (unlawful entry) of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700770

    Original file (MD0700770.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Diagnosis: Recommendation:20060130: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Discharge physical. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700318

    Original file (ND0700318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by two retention warnings, the award of six nonjudicial punishment (NJP), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article 87 (Missing Movement), and Article 92 (Disobeying a lawful order). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB...