Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700587
Original file (ND0700587.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-EMFA, USN
ND07-00587
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070328   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: PATTERN OF DISCREDITABLE BEHAVIOR WITH CIVIL OR MILITARY AUTHORITIES Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-158

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Request reentry into the service
                           2. Education

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall read PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .

Date: 20 071120       Location: Washington D.C   R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue( 1 ) : The Applicant is requesting reentry into the service. which the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding Reenlistment/RE-code s , for additional information.

Issue (2) : The Applicant is also seeking educational opportunities. which the Board does not have the authority to grant the type of relief the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding Employment/Educational Opportunities , for additional information.
The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation of a post-service nature for the Board to consider.

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 tha t

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20010330 - 20010423              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010424               Years Contracted :                Date of Discharge: 20030919
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 04 M on ths 26 D ys        Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 55          Highest Rank /Rate : EMFN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 1.7 ( 3 )       Behavior: 1.3 ( 3 )          OTA: 1.72
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, NER, SSDR, NUC

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

 20020716 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 134 - Underage drinking.
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 200.00 ) for ( 1 month); Restr for ( 20 days).
20020725 :        Retention Warning for underage drinking.

20030520:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 - Violation of a lawful general regulation.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 794.00 ) for ( 1 month); Restr for ( 30 days) .

20030912:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 - Failure to obey a lawful order, Art. 134 - Disorderly conduct.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 675.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 45 days).
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20030913
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20030913
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 CARL VINSON (CVN 70) ( 20030919 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20030919

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 f rom 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 1910-140, 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700732

    Original file (ND0700732.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    86 (2 specs) – UA 20010713 – 20010913 and 20010917 – 20010930; Art 87(3 specs) – Missing movement 20010817, 20010911 and 20010921. 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, Absence without leave (for more than 30 days). You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700570

    Original file (MD0700570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:None submitted. 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: USMCR (DEP)19930312 - 19940123Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19940124Years Contracted:; Extension:...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700265

    Original file (MD0700265.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    19930423: NJP imposed and suspended on 19930409 for a period of 6 months vacated.19930803: CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 19930824 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19930823) SJA review (date): (19930830) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 1 ST Marine Division (19930910) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO: Characterization directed: Date...

  • 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 | 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 | ND0700345

    Original file (ND0700345.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge:-Least Favorable Characterization: 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 Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): Separation Authority (date): NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for discharge directed: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20000929...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700293

    Original file (MD0700293.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 offenses 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...

  • 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...