An administrative separation board is the process required when the command desires to separate an enlisted service member when the enlisted member has either more than six years of total combined (reserve and active) service or when the command wishes the member receive an Other than Honorable characterization of service. Show  In most scenarios, an administrative separation board comes after the servicemember has already received a prior action that has been filed in one’s official record, whether in the form of nonjudicial punishment (known in some branches as Article 15, NJP, or Captain’s Mast), from an officially filed letter of reprimand, or from a negative evaluation. The administrative separation board consists of three members that hear evidence to decide if misconduct occurred, and if misconduct occurred (by a preponderance of evidence, or 51% or greater), they decide whether the servicemember should be permitted to stay in service. If the administrative separation board recommends separation, the board must also make a recommendation as to what the characterization should be, i.e. Honorable, General, Under Honorable Conditions or Other Than Honorable. As the drawdown impacts the various branches more and more, there is an increase in the number of administrative separation boards that are initiated by the command; there are also a rising number of boards that are being initiated by Human Resources Command, or the branch-specific equivalent. These boards are springing up as a result of the previous “bad paper” even though the command did not elect to initiate separation before. The Characterization of Service can have lasting effects in many areas of civilian life, including one’s ability to obtain meaningful employment. Characterization of service can also deny the member federal and state tuition assistance for college. The notion that the member can easily obtain an upgrade to their discharge is inaccurate; upgrades to discharge are increasingly difficult to obtain and the service boards presume that the characterization from the original discharge is correct and just. Boards of Inquiry – Officers There has been a significant increase in the numbers of boards initiated against officers. A board of inquiry (BOI) is the process by which a commissioned officer can be eliminated from the service administratively. A board of officer can be initiated by the command’s action, but can also be initiated by the centralized personnel resources section of the branch of service. The Army’s Human Resources Command (HRC) and other branch equivalents initiates an elimination proceeding against an Officer that is found to have “bad paper” in the Officer’s official file. Examples of “bad paper” that would generate an elimination action include letters of reprimand (GOMOR), a relief for cause evaluation report, or any “referred” evaluation report that includes derogatory information. Once an Officer receives notification of an elimination action, they have several options of how, if at all, to respond. The Officer can submit a resignation in lieu of elimination; the Officer can also respond in writing to the underlying allegations to request that the elimination action be rescinded; and the Officer can request, if the written matters do not convince the initiating commander to rescind the action, the Officer can opt for personal appearance and counsel’s representation at the board of inquiry. In most cases, the Officer has only thirty (30) calendar days to respond to the initial notification of elimination proceedings. Typically, after notice that a board will be convened, the board must occur within ninety (90) days. The rights to counsel before a board of inquiry closely mirror those for a court-martial: the right to detailed (assigned) military counsel at no cost, the right to hire civilian counsel at the Officer’s cost, and the right to both working on the case. Unlike courts-martial, an Officer will not typically receive two detailed military attorneys like he would at a court-martial if he does not hire civilian counsel. There are many strategies to combating elimination at a board of inquiry. Strategies vary according to the overall goal of the Officer. In some cases, the Officer has already acknowledged that he or she committed the underlying misconduct so that the goal at the board is to convince the members that the misconduct does not warrant elimination. In cases where the Officer has not acknowledged guilt and will not acknowledge committing the misconduct (whether because the Officer did not commit it, does not wish to admit it, or the evidence is not strong enough to convince the Officer that he or she should admit to it), the goal is to undermine the government’s evidence to appeal to the members for a finding of “no misconduct.” The required finding of the members at a board of inquiry or enlisted administrative separation is first to determine if by a preponderance (more likely than not) of the evidence the misconduct was committed by the “respondent.” The “respondent” is the term for the person facing elimination or separation. If the board concludes the respondent committed the misconduct, next the board must make a finding as to whether or not the misconduct warrants separation. If the board finds that elimination is warranted, then the board votes to determine the characterization of service. The methods of fighting elimination are many and varied, and a defense is only as limited as the imagination and devotion of the counsel representing the respondent. There are no rules of evidence at a board of inquiry or administrative separation and it is incumbent on the attorney to leverage as much evidence against the government’s counsel (called the recorder) as possible. Despite the truncated rights a member has in administrative processes when compared to those involved at courts-martial, Congress has required the military to establish due process rights in all administrative procedures. Unfortunately, while Officers and enlisted members are entitled to advice and representation from appointed military lawyers, these actions are labeled “priority 2 and 3 actions” and are put behind the court-martial duties of military defense lawyers. Ms. Stewart makes your career of the highest priority when you hire her as your attorney.
The Marine Corps order 1900.16 contains the Separation and Retirement Manual, which outlines the procedure, regulations and policies governing the administrative separation of enlisted members of the United States Navy. Administrative separations are not punitive discharges and they are based on the quality of service that has been demonstrated by the enlisted member of the Navy. WHEN IS SEPARATION CONSIDERED?When there is strong evidence to suggest that a Navy man cannot conform to the discipline, conduct or performance standards expected in the Navy, or that he does not do so for some reason, this could be a strong reason to consider separation. Apart from this, separations may be considered when the Navy man's ability to carry out his duties does not justify the cost of the resources that have been invested in him in terms of training and equipment. Fraudulent or erroneous enlistment parenthood, debilitating mental/ physical conditions, misconduct or poor performance may be the reason for separation of enlisted personnel in the Navy. PROCEDURESSeparation process with board action starts with a written notice being sent to the respondent telling him about the process being initiated against him. The notice should contain:
The separation should be completed within 50 working days of the respondent's receipt of the notice. If the matter is being sent to the Secretary of the Navy, it must be forwarded to him within 55 days of the receipt of notice by the respondent. The respondent has a two-day time period to respond after he receives the notice. His response is reviewed by the commanding officer who then decides whether or not to proceed with the discharge process. Apart from mandatory separation, in all other cases, reasonable efforts at rehabilitation have to be made before the proceedings are taken any further. When rehabilitation efforts have failed, the commanding officer initiates the separation proceedings after due notice to the respondent. The enlisted member has a right to get copies of all the documents that will be forwarded to the separation authority. He has a right to hire military counsel to represent him or represent himself during the hearing. An enlisted member with 6 or more years of service can request an administrative board for the hearing. Nonmilitary counsel may also be hired by the respondent at his own cost. Apart from these rights the respondent also has the right to call upon witnesses to substantiate his statements and he can question all the witnesses who are called during the proceedings. SEPARATION BOARD PROCESSINGThe command officer makes his own recommendation when he forwards the relevant documents to the separation authority and this recommendation bears weight. His recommendation covers discharge or retention of the enlisted member and the service characterization. The Marine officer holding the general court martial convening authority (GCMCA) is the separation authority. Unless the enlisted member waives his right to a Board, the separation authority convenes one to determine whether or not the respondent should be separated. The separation authority should ensure that at least three warrant, commissioned or non- commissioned officers form part of the board. The majority of the officer on the board must be drawn from the ranks of commissioned or warrant officers. The voting member must belong to a cadre that is above that of the respondent. The board determines if the evidence presented substantially indicates that the allegations outlined in the separation notice are justified. After due assessment of all facts, the board members make a recommendation regarding separation and a recommendation for service characterization. CHARACTERIZATION OF SERVICE FOR SEPARATIONThe characterization of service for purpose of separation plays a critical role in determining what benefits the respondent enjoys post separation. The following characterizations are possible:
Characterization is recognition of how well the enlisted member has performed his duties. When the separation is characterized by an honorable discharge, the respondent not just enjoys all veteran benefits but also finds it easy to find employment post Navy life. Joseph Jordan, expert military lawyer has won honorable discharges for many clients at U.S. Navy establishments across the country and abroad. |
When a member is not entitled to or waive an administrative board the member should be separated within what maximum working days of notification?
Related Posts
Copyright © 2024 themosti Inc.
