Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701097
Original file (ND0701097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AGAA, USN
ND07-01097

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070806   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT          Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-140

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Re ason change :

Applicant’s Issues:       1. Employment
                           2. Unfairly forced out of navy, i.e. Chief had it in for me.


Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 08 0117                     L ocation: Washington D.C                 R epresentation :


Discussion

 : 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 he was unfairly forced out of the Navy (his Chief had a grudge against him) when he wished to reenlist . 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 claim. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was improperly forced out or that his chain of command treated the Applicant unfairly in any way . To the contrary the record contains documentation of the Applicant’s two retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishments . Even if the Applicant could document his claim this would neither amount to a justification nor to a defense for the Applicant’s own misconduct. The record clearly reflects his willful misconduct which 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.

For the information of the Applicant, r egulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with the standards of discipline of the naval service. Based upon the record, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service 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 Ap plicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishment s and two retention warnings for repeated violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence , 3 specifications ) and 92 (failure to obey , 3 specifications) . These Nonjudicial punishments form the basis for the Applicants administrative discharge based on a pattern of misconduct which is defined as two or more nonjudicial punishments during the same enlistment. Additionally a violation of UCMJ Article 92 carries a penalty of a dishonorable discharge and up to two year s of imprisonment for each specification if adjudicated by a court martial. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade in his characterization of service.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presume s regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence ( to include evidence submitted by the Applicant ) to rebut the presumption . After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, m edical and s ervice r ecord e ntries, d ischarge p rocess and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP) 19980818 - 19981108       
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19981109      Years Contracted : 4 ; Extension: 22 months                  Date of Discharge: 20040607      
Length of Service : 05 Yrs 06 Mths 29 D ys                                                                Lost Time :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment: 19     AFQT: 53          Highest Rank /Rate : AGAN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 2.7 ( 6 )      Behavior: 3.2 ( 6 )                 OTA: 2.88 (6)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, SSDR (3), Overseas Service Ribbon


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

 20000905:        NJP – Viol ations of UCMJ Art icles 86 (unauthorized absence) and 92 (failure to obey)
         Awarded - FOP ( $100/month for two months ); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days).

20001201:        NJP – Violation of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence).
         Awarded - FOP ( $200/month for two months ); RIR ( E-1, suspended for three months ); Restr ( 21 days); Extra duties ( 21 days).

20001205:        Retention Warning for Violations of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence).

20020915:        Applicant reported for duty aboard NPMOC, Yokosuka Japan.
20040331:        NJP – Viol ation of UCMJ Art icle s 86 (unauthorized absence) and 92 (failure to obey)
         Awarded - FOP 1/2 pay per month for two months ); RIR ( E-3, suspended for 60 days) ; Extra duties ( 30 days).

20040331:        Retention Warning for Violations of UCMJ Articles 86 and 92.
20040507:        Suspended punishment from NJP on 20040331 vacated due to continued misconduct.

20040507:        NJP – Viol ation of UCMJ Art icle 92 (violation of a general regulation).
         Awarded - RIR ( E-2 ).

20040514:        Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Pacific Meteorology and Oceanography Center Yokosuka, Japan informed Commander Naval Personnel Command of the Applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service as General (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct by a pattern of misconduct. Commanding Officer’s comments: “AGAA H_ (Applicant) was notified of his separation processing. He is awarded General Discharge with a code of GKA due to his general disregard of Naval Regulations. His inability to progress from corrective disciplinary actions, in an environment governed by military standards and core values, warrants his administrative discharge. ”

20040607:        Applicant discharged.


Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20040511      
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20040511
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement                                   
         GCMCA review                               

Separation Authority (date):     Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Pacific Meteorology and Oceanography Center Yokosuka, Japan ( 20040514 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20040607


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 Aug 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 .

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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501361

    Original file (ND0501361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19900817 – 19910814 COG Active: USN 19910815 – 19950813 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19950814 Date of Discharge: 19960503 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 08 19 Inactive: None ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601219

    Original file (MD0601219.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was afforded appropriate treatment for his alcohol abuse problem, and his discharge for misconduct was suspended for one year in order to provide him an opportunity to rehabilitate his performance and conduct. 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 the Applicant’s discharge proper and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701075

    Original file (ND0701075.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. Appeal denied 19921002: Vacated previously suspended punishment due to continued misconduct.19921002: NJP – Violation of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence, three specifications): 0630 19920919 UA from restricted muster, 0630 19920922 UA from restricted muster, 0630 19920923 Awarded - FOP ($100/month for two...

  • 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...

  • 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 | ND0700861

    Original file (ND0700861.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)19990520 - 19990728Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990729Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20020905Length of Service: 03Yrs 01Mths07 DysLost Time:unable to accurately...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600481

    Original file (ND0600481.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 050105: The Applicant was discharged. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700829

    Original file (ND0700829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The summary of service clearly documents the Applicant’sthree NJPs for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 91 (disobey a lawful order), 107 (false official statement), and 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700136

    Original file (ND0700136.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 discharger and characterization of his service. Awarded - FOP $200.00 -2 months; Restr - 30 days; Extra duties - 30 days.19991020: Retention Warning forfailure to obey a lawful written instruction (underage drinking).20000210: CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700763

    Original file (ND0700763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Each violation of UCMJ Article 91 and 92constitutes the “commission of a serious offense” which forms the basis for the Applicant’s discharge and is punishable by a dishonorable discharge and up to three years of imprisonment for each specification. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20060206Reason for Discharge:-Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20060206 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit...