Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700862
Original file (ND0700862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ENFR, USN
ND07-00862
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070613   Characterization Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT     Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlistment Opportunities
                           2. Chain of Command did not stand up for its members

Decision

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

Date: 20 080103             Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

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 implies that h is chain of command did not stand up for its members. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the command did not support him or other members of the command and singled h im out for ridicule or discipline. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

T he Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant committed misconduct on numerous occasions. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for h is conduct or that he should not be held accountable for h is actions . When a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A 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 discharge warning , three nonjudicial punishments ( NJP ), and two Summary Court-Martial’s for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86 ( Unauthorized absence ), and Article 92 (Dereliction in the performance of duties). A v iolation of Article 92 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate

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 :

         “ 03 11 25 ”
         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
        

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)      20000208 - 20000303 ELS                   Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20000316 - 20000322
Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20000323      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 200 3 112 5
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 08 Mths 04 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d : 30
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 34          Highest Rank /Rate : ENFN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )       Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )                  OTA: 3.50
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM

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

 20010817 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Dereliction in the performance of duties .
         Awarded - RIR ( E-3 ); Restr for ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days) .
20010818:        Retention Warning for violation of Art. 92 - D ereliction in the performance of duties .

20020716:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Dereliction in the performance of duties.
         Awarded - Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).

20021023:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Dereliction in the performance of duties .
         Awarded – Confinement on bread and water for 3 days .

20030405:        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 .
         Awarded - FOP ($800.00) for (1 month); RIR (E-1); Restr for (60 days).
20030921:        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Absent without leave.
         Awarded - FOP ($863.10) for (1 month); Confinement (30 days).

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Reason 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 RECORD
Reason for discharge directed: 
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20031125

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) GED from State of Georgia, Georgia National Guard Youth Challenge Academy Diploma, National Guard Challenge Outstanding Performacne Award, Certificate of Appreciation from Youth Challenge Academy

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 January 2004, 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 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 | ND0700808

    Original file (ND0700808.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 warning and four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 92 (Dereliction in the performance of duties), and Article 92 (Failure to obey other lawful order). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700775

    Original file (ND0700775.doc) 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 five retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (unauthorized Absence), Article 92 (Dereliction of Duty), Article 121 (Larceny), and Article 134 (Unlawful Entry). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700585

    Original file (ND0700585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warnings and 4 nonjudicial punishments for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 92 (dereliction of duty) and 134 (incapacitating oneself for performance of duties). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700404

    Original file (ND0700404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the record that the Separation Authority failed to consider all relevant factors, including the Applicant’s overall service, in determining that an under than honorable conditions discharge was warranted. 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. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700558

    Original file (ND0700558.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 three nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Articles 86 [Failure to go at the time to appointed place of duty (two specifications)] and Article 92 [Dereliction in the performance of duties (two specifications)].The Board determined that the occurrence of these offenses did establish a...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700171

    Original file (MD0700171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found that Discussion Issue 1: 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. Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19880514 - 19880906 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19880907Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge:19911230 Length of Service: 3 Yrs 2Mths26 DysLost Time:Days...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701044

    Original file (ND0701044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warning and the award of two nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 92 (Disobey a lawful order), and Article 92 (Dereliction of duty). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700365

    Original file (ND0700365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - FOP ($692.00) for (2 months); RIR (E-3); Restr for (30 days); Extra duties (30 days).20021107: Retention Warning for unauthorized absence, wrongfully consume alcoholic beverages as a minor, dereliction of duty, failure to obey a lawful order.20031207: NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the Board...

  • 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...