Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700780
Original file (ND0700780.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ADAR, USN
ND07-00780
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070515   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE     Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Post service
                 
Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

Date: 20 071220                   Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ). 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)      19980328 - 19981026              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19981027      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20001116
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 11 Mths 12 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: 36 Days Confine d : 30
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 37          Highest Rank /Rate : ADAN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A              OTA: N/A
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): SSDR, AFEM

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

 19990325 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence; viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Failure to obey a lawful order; viol UCMJ Art. 134 – False pass offense .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 450.00 ) for ( 1 month); Correctional Custody ( 30 days).
19990325:        Retention Warning for your NJP held on 19990325 for VUMCJ Art. 86, UA, 92, order violation, 134, false pass offense.
20000128:        Applicant to unauthorized absence at 1600.

20000130:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0900 .

20000215 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – (5 specs) Unauthorized absence, viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Failure to obey a lawful order .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 502.00 ) for ( 1 month); RIR , suspended for 6 months ; Restr for ( 30 days) 5 days suspended for 6 months ; Extra duties ( 30 days) 5 days suspended for 6 months .
20000215:        Retention Warning for Commanding Officer’s NJP on 20000215 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (5 specs), Unauthorized absence, Article 92, Failure to obey a lawful order.
20000802:        Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0630.

20000907:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0900.

 20000920 :        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence; viol UCMJ Art. 87 – Miss ship’s movement; viol UCMJ, Art 92 – Dereliction of duty .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 670.00 ) for ( 1 month); RIR ( E-1 ); Confinement ( 30 days) .

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20001005
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20000912
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20001017 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMCARGRU SEVEN ( 20001101 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20001116

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) Constituent Service Form to Congressman T_ R. P_




Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 30, dated 7 Nov 00, effective 30 Aug 00 until 24 Jan 01, 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 .




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 | ND0700541

    Original file (ND0700541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s summary of service clearly documents the Applicants misconduct resulting in a civilian conviction and four nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, four specifications), 92 (failure to obey), 107 (false official statement, two specifications) and 128 (assault). The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and the characterization 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 | ND0700284

    Original file (ND0700284.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 his service. Recommendation on Separation: - Recommendation on Characterization: Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19930219) Separation Authority (date): BUPERS (19930310)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 19930324 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701068

    Original file (ND0701068.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)19920806 - 19930124Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19930125Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19950315Length of Service: 02 Yrs 01Mths21 DysLost Time:Days UA: 1 Days Confined: Education...

  • 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 | ND0700183

    Original file (ND0700183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. 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. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if...

  • 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 | MD0700455

    Original file (MD0700455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge 20010702: Applicant counseled concerning an alcohol-related incident specifically getting drunk and going into an unauthorized absence status. Applicant chose not to make a statement.20031016: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Facial Injury due to fight/altercation: Diagnosis: Recommendation:20031201: MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for pattern of misconduct, violation of Articles 86, 92,121, and 134. ...

  • 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 | 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). ...