Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900055
Original file (ND0900055.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AMAR, USN (TAR)
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081007
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge : M ILPERSMAN 1910-700 (PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT) [listed in DD214]

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20011031 - 20011216     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20011217     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030905      Highest Rank/Rate: AMAA
Length of Service : Y ear M onth s 19 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 74
Evaluation M arks: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF : None

NJP :
- 20021206 :       Article 92 ( Failure to obey and order or regulation, p roviding alcohol to persons under the age of 21)
          Awarded : Susp ended : & EPD (6 mo nth s)

- 20030825 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation)
          Awarded : NFIR, but recommended for separation by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct per MILPERMAN ref 1910-140
S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20021209 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 92 (Providing alcohol to persons under the age of 21)

administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ MILPERSMAN 1910-140 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.
Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:     
DD 214:         Service/ Medical Record:                  Other Records:


Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:                References:              
Additional Statements :
 From Applicant:        From Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

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, 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 .




DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Reenlistment opportunity.
2. Isolated incident of misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0129             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .
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 , specifically the paragraph concerning , regarding this Issue.
: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service which was good apart from an isolated incident of misconduct. 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. The Applicant’s re cord of service was marred by one retention warning and two NJPs for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Disobeying a lawful order). Violations of Article 92 are considered serious offenses which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court - martial. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court - martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The NDRB specifically notes the Applicant received his retention warning following his first NJP. Nevertheless, the Applicant was subject to a second NJP for the same offense nine months later. The NDRB rejects the Applicant’s contention his misconduct was isolated. The record of evidence clearly shows two distinct offenses 8 months apart; the second offense occurred following a warning that clearly stated further misconduct could be used as grounds for an administrative separation. The NDRB determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved . An upgrade would be inappropriate.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found


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 or is referred to a court martial 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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, 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 other medical related reasons. 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801036

    Original file (ND0801036.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board did determine the Applicant’s discharge process contained administrative errors which resulted in the erroneous use of “Pattern of Misconduct” as the narrative reason for discharge. By a unanimous vote the Board determined the characterization of service should remain “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” and the narrative reason for discharge should change to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500875

    Original file (ND0500875.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000584

    Original file (ND1000584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported both reasons for discharge and that separation from the Naval Service was warranted; as such, he directed that the Applicant be separated and that the basis for separation on the DD Form214 be Pattern of Misconduct. The Separation Authority further determined that the Applicant should be discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of his service and that he receive an RE-4...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900312

    Original file (ND0900312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB reviewed the Applicant’s service medical record and determined the Applicant was not diagnosed with a mental illness while in the Navy. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s record of service would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900423

    Original file (ND0900423.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service which was good apart from a single period of misconductand he did not have a pattern of misconduct because it was based on an isolated incident “…stemming from a conflict-of-interest situation …” 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. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000961

    Original file (ND1000961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the seriousness of the offense and the pattern of misconduct established by the misconduct of record, the Command recommended separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service at discharge.Upon review of the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service. ” Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500221

    Original file (ND1500221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded: RESTR EPD Suspended: NONE [Provided to NDRB by USS HALYBURTON (FFG20) with Administrative Separation package on 20120227] Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service/Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700497

    Original file (ND0700497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Members may be separated by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct when during the current enlistment they have a set pattern of failure to pay just debts. 20060412: COMNAVPERSCOM directed Applicant’s Commanding Officer to determine whether to suspend Applicant’s access to classified material pending resolution of clearance issues. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20060427Reason for Discharge:-Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20060427Rights...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801438

    Original file (ND0801438.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraph concerning Reenlistment/Re-Codes,for additional information regarding .After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600462

    Original file (ND0600462.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 (Member 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20000207 - 20000816ELS USNR (DEP) 20010921 - 20011118 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20011119 Date of Discharge: 20050310 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 03 0322(Does not...