Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700812
Original file (ND0700812.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ADAR, USN
ND07-00812
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070524   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT         Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-140

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Discharged for one incident

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 071220             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ). The evidence of record clearly demonstrates that the Applicant had 2 nonjudicial punishments between which he also received a retention warning. The Applicant’s documented misconduct and poor performance met the definition of a pattern of misconduct.

Issue 2 ( ). Although not raised by the Applicant, the Board noted that the notice of administrative separation incorrectly indicated that that review by a general court-martial convening authority was not applicable. Because of the Applicant’s misconduct for which he was disciplined and his overall performance as documented in his performance evaluations, the Board determined that a characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) was more appropriate than a characterization of service as honorable. Further, because the Applicant elected, and met with, counsel prior to exercising his election of rights, the Board was satisfied that he was not prejudiced by the error in the notification.

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 :

         “ JKA ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20000127 - 20000502              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20000503                        Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20031029
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 05 Mths 27 D ys                   Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:                  Age at Enlistment:                AFQT: 63          Highest Rank /Rate : ADAN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 2.0 ( 4 )       Behavior: 2.3 ( 4 )                   OTA: 2.33
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): AFEM, MUC, ND S M, SSDR(2)

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

20030227:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 – 20030219, repeatedly failed to safety wire drains as ordered to by AD2 .
         Awarded - FOP ( 619.00 ) for (1 month) , susp 60 days ; RIR (E-2); Restr for (45 days) susp 60 days .
200303 1 1:        Retention Warning for CO’s NJP of 20030227 for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (Dereliction of duty).
20031009 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – 20030813, u nauthorized absence from duty muster ; Art. 92 – (2 Specs) 20030813 failed to be at recall on prescribed duty day and 20031004 failed to be in proper uniform for barracks re-inspection.
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 619.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr for ( 60 days).
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20031014
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20031016
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                                (see NDRB discussion on Issue 2, above)

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
Separation Authority (date):     CO , ELECTRONIC ATTACK SQUADRON 131 ( 20031022 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20031029

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 January 2004, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), 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 | ND0700212

    Original file (ND0700212.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, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found no evidence that the Applicant’s discharge was fair.When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700915

    Original file (ND0700915.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: USNR (DEP)20000926 - 20000927Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000928Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20020219Length of Service: 1 Yrs 4Mths22 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701027

    Original file (ND0701027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700156

    Original file (MD0700156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.. Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19990730 - 20000820Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000821Years Contracted:Date of Discharge:20030210 Length of Service: 02 Yrs 05Mths10 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 31MOS:3381Highest Rank: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 3.8(7)/3.8(7)Fitness reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):NATIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00752

    Original file (MD04-00752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00752 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040330. He is pending NJP.”020624: SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.020627: GCMCA, CG, 1 st Marine Division, directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.020701: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a (1 Spec):Spec 1: In that PVT Jones, did at CamPen, or in civilian community, on or about 020602,...

  • 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700956

    Original file (ND0700956.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: “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ...

  • 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...