Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701130
Original file (ND0701130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AN, USN
ND07-01130
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070817   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. Applicant alleged unfair treatment, harassment and misjudged by command

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 08 0124             Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ). Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because he was treated unfairly, harassed by higher ranked staff and misjudged . In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. The Applicant has submitted no documentation, nor does the record contain any evidence of any wrongdoing by the Applicant’s Commanding Officer or anyone in his chain of command for that matter , in the discharge process. 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. Therefore the Board found his General under honorable conditions characterization appropriate.

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)      20020417 - 200 2 0429              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 200 2 0430               Years Contracted : ; Extension:            Date of Discharge: 20040402
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 11 Mths 03 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 31          Highest Rank /Rate : AN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 1.0 ( 1 )       Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )                  OTA: 1.16
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM

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

 20030326:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence, viol UCMJ, Art. 92 – Failure to obey order or regulation, viol UCMJ Art. 107 – False Official Statement .
         Awarded – 30 days CCU .
20030326:        Retention Warning for violation of the UCMJ, Articles 86 (Unauthorized absence), 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation ) , 107 (False Official Statement).

20030906:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 134 - Fighting.
         Awarded - Extra duties (30 days), Class Charlie Liberty Risk.

20030906:        Retention Warning for violation of the UCMJ, Articles 134 (Fighting).
20031031         Medical Record: Reason for visit- To medical by LPO after making a statem en t that he would do harm to himself and others. Denies actual plan to follow through w/ threat ; a dmits to losing temper. Assessment –nl exam. Plan- 1) counseled on anger management , 2) COC contacted; this is a leadership issue & guided on proper action 3) Return to duty
 20040114:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence.
         Awarded - Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days ) , administrative separation .

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       2 0040114
Reason for Discharge:     -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20040114
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, ELETRONIC ATTACK SQUADRON ONE THREE SEVEN ( 20040120 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20040402

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 .


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 | ND0700942

    Original file (ND0700942.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date: 20080103Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion Issues 1 -2: 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’s service was marred by one discharge warning and two non-judicial punishments for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92 (Failure to obey a direct order), Article 107 (False Official Statement), Article...

  • 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 | ND0700677

    Original file (ND0700677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other narrative reason for separation or characterization could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged. 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) 20000629 - 20010121 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010122Years...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700506

    Original file (MD0700506.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20030401)SJA review (date): (20030711) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 3D MARINE DIVISION (20030715) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 2030729 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501267

    Original file (MD0501267.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The evaluating Psychologist recommends administrative separation due to alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.031217: Restriction and extra duty awarded at NJP on 031003 vacated.040219: Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune: Applicant refused treatment for substance abuse and was counseled regarding treatment...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701119

    Original file (MD0701119.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 five discharge warnings and one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation(s) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Articles 128 and 134. 20030326 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation...

  • 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 | MD0700427

    Original file (MD0700427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discussion Issue(s) 1 - 2: 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. Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): SJA review (date): Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 4 TH MARINE DIVISION (20041209) Basis for discharge...

  • 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 | 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...