Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700346
Original file (ND0700346.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ENFN, USN
ND07-00346
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070124   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to: MEDICAL DISABILITY
Applicant’s Issues:       1 . Unfairly treated by the command leadership and members of the command
                           2. Served honorably and therefore his Narrative Reason should not read Misconduct but changed to medical disability based on injuries received on 20050823

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .

Date: 20 071115       Location: Washington D.C   R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: ( ). The Applicant contends that he was unfairly treated by the command leadership and members of the command . 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 contention that he was wrongfully charged and disciplined. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue 2: ( ). The Applicant contends that he s erved honorably and therefore his Narrative Reason should not read Misconduct but should read medical disability based on injuries received on 20050823. The Board found no medical diagnosis or recommendation by competent medical authority that c ould have resulted in discharge proceedings based on medical reasons. Therefore, medical issues did not preclude the Applicant from completing his service contract. The Board considered the Applicant’s total service record . The Applicant’s total service was marred by the award of two retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishment s (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 89 ( Failure to obey a lawful order ), Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, non commissioned officer or petty officer ), Article 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful order ), Article 1 1 7 ( Provoking speeches and gestures ), and Article 134 ( Unlawfully entry and Threat Communication ). Violations of UCMJ Article s 91 , 92 and 134 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. The portion of the Applicant ’s service record prior to the injuries that occurred on 20050823 was marred by one retention warning and two nonjudicial punishment s (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, non commissioned officer or petty officer ) and Article 134 ( Unlawfully entry ). Violations of UCMJ Article s 91and 134 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. The Board determined that an upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate and also determined that the narrative reason was appropriate.

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)      20030709 - 20040307              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20040308               Years Contracted : ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20051005
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 06 Mths 28 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 47          Highest Rank /Rate : ENFA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.4 ( 1 )       Behavior: 4.0 ( 1 )                   OTA: 3.17
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NER, NDSM, GWOTSM

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

 20040616:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Absence without leave; viol UCMJ Art. 134 – Unlawfully entry.
         Awarded - Restr for (14 days); Extra duties (14 days).
20050810 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 91 – Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, non commissioned officer or petty officer .
         Awarded - Restr for ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days) .
20050810:        Retention Warning for violation of the UCMJ Article 91 (Contempt or disrespect toward warrant, non commissioned, or petty officer.
20050825 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 134 – Threat communicating .
         Awarded - Restr for ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days).
20050825:        Retention Warning fo r violation of the UCMJ Article 134 (Threat Communication) .

20050902:        Commanding Officer’s letter to Command er Destroyer Squadron 31 recommending denial of NJP appeal. FA P _ has a documented history of confrontational behavior toward his Chain of Command and peers alike.

20050928 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 91 – Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, non commissioned officer or petty officer; viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Failure to obey a lawful order; viol UCMJ Art. 117 – Provoking speeches and gestures ; viol UCMJ Art. 89 – Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer .
         Awarded - Restr for ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days).
20050928:        Commanding Officer ’s letter setting side the remained of 41 days of restriction awarded on 20050810 and 20050928.
         Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20080928
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20051003
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING OFFICER, USS RUSSELL (DDG 5) ( UNDATED )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20051005

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) DVA Rating Decision, Statement in Support of Claim, 2006 Income Tax Return

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective
26 April 2005 until Present, 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 91, 92, and 134.

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

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700447

    Original file (ND0700447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of service. 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 did note administrative errors on the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700634

    Original file (ND0700634.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant's misconduct is clearly documented . ” 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. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700404

    Original file (ND0700404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the record that the Separation Authority failed to consider all relevant factors, including the Applicant’s overall service, in determining that an under than honorable conditions discharge was warranted. 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. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700394

    Original file (ND0700394.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ 02JAN2000-04JAN2000 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Awarded - Restr for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700731

    Original file (ND0700731.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Summary of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701034

    Original file (ND0701034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: USNR (DEP)19950831 - 19950919Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19950920Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19990709Length of Service: 03 Yrs 09Mths20 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700657

    Original file (MD0700657.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19960221 - 19960225Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19960226Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19970213Length of Service: 00 Yrs 11Mths18 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700405

    Original file (ND0700405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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 . ” 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...