Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700487
Original file (ND0700487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-SN, USN
ND07-00487
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20010307   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-140

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

Decision

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

Date: 20 071205                     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 contends that his problems were attributed to his immaturity. While he may feel that this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. When a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. 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 one retention warnings, the award of two nonjudicial punishment s (NJP), for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence). Violation of UCMJ Article 86 ( more than 30 days) is considered a serious offense 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.

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, or good conduct 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 a DD-214 indicating that he served honorably with the Wisconsin Air National Guard in Iraq . The Applicant also indicated that he provided copies of his medals received while in the Wisconsin Air National Guard. The Board found no such copies of these awards. The Board requested copies of these awards along with copies of performance evaluations and character reference statements by his leadership on 20071030. The Applicant was not available at the phone number and did not respond to the email address that he provided on the DD-293. Without this additional documentation, and evidence of other post service endeavors, (i.e., evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities ), t he Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct 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 th at



Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US ANG           199903 - 200005         USNR (DEP)       20001031 - 20010108      Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010109      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20011004
Length of Service : 00 Yrs 08 Mths 26 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: 60 Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 59          Highest Rank /Rate : SN
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

 20010621:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 - Unauthorized absence (13 days, 7 hours, 30 minutes) .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 566.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days). FOP, RIR, Restr and Extra duties suspended for 6 months.

20010621:        Retention Warning for unauthorized absence.

20010823 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 - Unauthorized absence (3 1 days, 7 hours, 50 minutes) .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 585/00 ) for ( 2 months); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days) , oral reprimand. Restr and Extra duties suspended for 6 months .
20010918:        Applicant to unauthorized absence 0800.

 20011004:        Applicant return ed to military control for administrative purposes 0800 (16 days, 45 minutes).
.
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20010831
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20010831
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20010831 )
 Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, NAVAL TRAINING CENTER, GREAT LAKES ( 20010905 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20011004

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 18, effective 12 Dec ember 1997 until 21 Aug ust 2002,
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 .

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 86 Unauthorized Absence (more than 30 days).



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 | 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 | ND0700577

    Original file (ND0700577.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 Discharge Process Date Notified: 20010801Reason for Discharge: - Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20010801 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700743

    Original file (MD0700743.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Date:20071115Location:Washington D.C.Representation: Discussion Issue 1 (Equity): With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency (leniency). After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and the standards of discipline, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700319

    Original file (ND0700319.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of one retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 [Unauthorized Absence (four specifications)] and Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer).An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.In reviewing discharges, the Board...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801126

    Original file (ND0801126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined based on the documentation provided the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700261

    Original file (MD0700261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Date Notified: 19930428Basis for Discharge: DUE TO Least Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:19930428Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19930428) SJA review (date): (19930518) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, 2D MARINE DIVISION(19930519) Basis for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700610

    Original file (ND0700610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any/sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct 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,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801068

    Original file (MD0801068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTIONS TO THE APPLICANT’S DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700122

    Original file (MD0700122.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date:20070830Location:Washington D.C.The Board found that Discussion Issue(s) 1-2: The Board determined that this Issue is not an issue 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. 86 - Unauthorized absence (7 dys).Awarded - FOP ($552.00) for (2 months); Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).20020322: Applicant to voluntary leave. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a...