Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700398
Original file (ND0700398.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AOAA, USN
ND07-00398
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070206   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT DUE TO COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlistment Opportunities
                           2. Requesting Narrative Reason Change
                           3. Post Service

Decision

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

Date: 20 071018                                             Location: Washington D.C.       

Discussion

 Issue 1: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2: ( ). The Applicant was the subject of a Summary Court-Martial for violations of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article 87 (missing Movement), and Article 92 (Failure to obey an order). Articles 87 and 92 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to general under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate. The current assigned Narrative Reason code on the Applicant’s DD214 is administratively incorrect. The correct narrative reason for Separation code HKQ is Misconduct. The NDRB recommend s changing this entry.

Issue 3: ( ). The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge, may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, good conduct, or favorable endorsements in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered. The Applicant provided his statement only. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. 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. 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:

         “ MISCONDUCT ”
         “ 22MAY2001-10JUN2001 ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20001212 - 20001214              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20001214               Years Contracted : ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20011119
Length of Service : 00 Yrs 11 Mths 06 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d : 15
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 58          Highest Rank /Rate : AOAR
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A             OTA: N/A
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

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

 20010823 :        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence; viol UCMJ Art. 87 – Missing ship’s movement; viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Failure to obey a lawful order .
         Awarded - FOP ( $695.00 ) for ( 1 month); Extra duties (22 days) ; Confinement ( 15 days) .

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20011022
Reason for Discharge:     -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20011022
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20011106 )
Separation Authority (date):     CARRIER GROUP SEVEN
Reason for discharge directed: 
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20011119










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 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 25 Jan 01 until 21 Aug 02, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. 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 87 and 92.

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 | ND0700437

    Original file (ND0700437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warning, the award of three nonjudicial punishment (NJP)for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ),Article 81 (Conspiracy), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 87 (Missing movement), and Article 92 (Failure to obey 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700898

    Original file (ND0700898.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: “ 1910-134 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Recommendation on...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701177

    Original file (ND0701177.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date: 20080124Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. Certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.The Applicant’s service was marred by three nonjudicial punishment for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700888

    Original file (ND0700888.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade in the characterization of service. The Board voted 5-0 that the narrative reason shall change to Secretarial Authority.The Applicant was notified of his intended administrative discharge by reason on misconduct due to the commission of a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300379

    Original file (ND1300379.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants to reenlist in the Navy. 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...

  • 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). ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700783

    Original file (ND0700783.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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19830216 - 19830217 Active: 19830218 - 19870122 19870123 - 19901030 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19901031 Years Contracted: ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 19930820 Length of Service: 02 Yrs 09 Mths 20...

  • 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 | ND0700598

    Original file (ND0700598.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues: 1. 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 86, Absence without leave (for more than 30 days); Article 87, Missing movement; and Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change...