Naval Station Great Lakes Boards of Inquiry & Administrative Separation Lawyers
Table Contents
A Board of Inquiry for officers and an administrative separation board for enlisted personnel are formal panels convened to determine whether a service member should be separated from the military, including those stationed at Naval Station Great Lakes. Officer cases are heard by a Board of Inquiry composed of commissioned officers, while enlisted cases are heard by an administrative separation board typically composed of senior enlisted members and, in some instances, officers, depending on service regulations.
The government bears the burden of proof in both officer and enlisted separation proceedings, generally using a preponderance of the evidence standard. This evidentiary threshold requires showing that it is more likely than not that the alleged misconduct or performance issues occurred, and that those issues meet regulatory grounds for separation.
These boards differ significantly from courts-martial because they are administrative—not criminal—processes. They do not determine criminal guilt or impose punitive sentences; instead, they assess service suitability, rely on more flexible rules of evidence, and focus on the retention or separation decision rather than punishment.
Because the board’s findings directly determine whether an officer or enlisted member may continue serving, these proceedings often represent the final career decision point. The panel’s conclusions regarding the underlying allegations and the member’s future service eligibility generally close the administrative record on the matter.
A Board of Inquiry or administrative separation is a non‑judicial process that reviews alleged misconduct and can end a military career without a court‑martial, affecting rank, retirement eligibility, and discharge characterization at Naval Station Great Lakes. Gonzalez & Waddington provide guidance at 1‑800‑921‑8607.
Watch the criminal defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington break down how they defend criminal cases and service members worldwide against Federal Charges, Florida State Charges, UCMJ allegations, CID/NCIS/OSI investigations, court-martials, Article 120 cases, administrative separations, and GOMORs. If you’re under investigation or facing charges, this video explains what your rights are and how experienced criminal defense lawyers can make the difference.
Naval Station Great Lakes hosts large training and operational support commands, which naturally creates a high level of command oversight and unit visibility. With many service members concentrated in one location, leadership closely monitors compliance with standards, training performance, and conduct expectations, increasing the likelihood that potential issues are identified and formally reviewed.
When concerns do arise, they often begin with routine command actions such as investigations, written reprimands, or non‑judicial punishment. These initial steps can prompt leaders to evaluate a service member’s overall record, and if patterns of deficiencies appear, the matter may progress into administrative separation processing or a Board of Inquiry to determine whether continued service is appropriate.
Leadership risk tolerance also plays a key role. Commands at Great Lakes must balance training mission requirements, accountability, and long-term career management decisions. When leaders determine that certain conduct or performance concerns could affect mission readiness or future assignments, they may opt for administrative separation procedures as the most suitable administrative response.
If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges or a criminal investigation by federal authorities, the military, or the State of Florida, early defense matters. Gonzalez & Waddington provide disciplined, trial-focused criminal defense for high-stakes cases involving serious allegations and complex evidence. To speak with experienced criminal defense lawyers and get confidential guidance, call 1-800-921-8607 or text 954-909-7407 to request a no-cost, confidential consultation.
The administrative separation process at Naval Station Great Lakes follows a structured sequence designed to determine whether continued naval service is appropriate based on the circumstances prompting the case. Each phase focuses on documenting actions, reviewing relevant information, and evaluating the service member’s record.
The Board of Inquiry conducts its proceedings according to established naval regulations, using standardized procedures for presenting information, hearing testimony, and determining findings. The concluding steps involve forwarding recommendations to the designated authority for a final determination.
These boards typically review a range of documentary materials gathered during command investigations, including written statements, incident reports, prior reprimands, and records of non‑judicial punishment. Such documents provide a factual baseline that board members use to understand the circumstances underlying the case and the service member’s history of conduct.
Witness testimony is also frequently presented, and board members evaluate not only what each witness states but also the credibility and consistency of those accounts. Supervisors, peers, and involved personnel may be asked to explain their observations, clarify events, or address discrepancies found in earlier investigative materials.
Administrative records, such as evaluations, training reports, and qualification documents, are weighed alongside the investigative file to give the board a broader view of the service member’s performance and professional trajectory. These records help contextualize the specific allegations within the service member’s overall administrative and duty history.
Administrative separations at Naval Station Great Lakes typically result in one of three characterizations of service: Honorable, General (Under Honorable Conditions), or Other Than Honorable (OTH). Each reflects the command’s assessment of a sailor’s overall performance and conduct, with Honorable indicating consistent adherence to standards, General noting some deficiencies, and OTH reserved for more serious misconduct.
These characterizations can influence retirement eligibility because they form part of the official determination of whether a sailor has completed service under conditions that meet regulatory requirements for length‑of‑service retirement. While administrative separation normally occurs before a member reaches retirement tenure, the characterization can still shape how prior service is viewed in any later evaluations or benefits determinations.
An unfavorable characterization may also affect certain post‑service entitlements, as some benefits require an Honorable discharge while others may be available with a General discharge. An OTH characterization carries the highest risk of limiting access to benefits and can lead to additional review processes for any benefit applications.
Long‑term consequences extend beyond immediate benefits. Employers, licensing authorities, and review boards may request or access discharge documents, and the characterization can influence professional opportunities, security‑related positions, and perceptions of a sailor’s service history throughout their post‑military career.
At Naval Station Great Lakes, Boards of Inquiry and administrative separation actions are often informed by earlier command-directed investigations, which establish the factual basis for determining whether alleged misconduct or substandard performance warrants further administrative review. These investigations frequently serve as the foundation upon which commanders decide whether a service member’s conduct should progress to more formal administrative processes.
Administrative measures such as Letters of Reprimand may also influence whether a Board of Inquiry is convened, as repeated or serious reprimands can demonstrate a pattern of behavior inconsistent with Navy standards. Likewise, outcomes of non-judicial punishment can factor heavily into separation decisions, especially when NJP findings support a commander’s assessment that continued service is no longer appropriate.
In more serious cases, administrative separation proceedings may run parallel to or follow court-martial proceedings, particularly when the misconduct is severe enough to warrant judicial action but administrative consequences are still required to protect the integrity of the service. Together, these mechanisms create a layered system in which administrative and judicial processes collectively determine a sailor’s future in the Navy.
With decades of military justice experience, Gonzalez & Waddington bring deep familiarity with board-level litigation, including the unique procedures and evidentiary standards that govern Boards of Inquiry and administrative separation actions at Naval Station Great Lakes. Their background allows them to navigate complex timelines, command processes, and the interplay between administrative and disciplinary tracks.
The firm’s approach emphasizes meticulous witness examination and comprehensive record‑building, ensuring the board is presented with a clear, organized, and well‑supported depiction of the service member’s case. This attention to detail helps create an administrative record that accurately reflects the facts and preserves key issues for review when necessary.
Their representation also integrates seamlessly with related matters such as rebuttals to reprimands, responses to NJP allegations, and defense during command investigations. This coordinated strategy helps service members manage multiple, overlapping actions that often influence the outcome and scope of a Board of Inquiry or administrative separation proceeding.
Answer: Yes, an administrative separation can occur without a court-martial if the command believes a service member no longer meets retention standards. This process is administrative rather than criminal and follows its own procedures.
Answer: A Board of Inquiry is a formal administrative hearing focused on whether separation is warranted, while NJP is a disciplinary tool used by commanders for minor offenses. The BOI involves a panel and the presentation of evidence, whereas NJP is conducted solely by the commanding officer.
Answer: The burden of proof at a BOI is typically a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the allegation is more likely than not to be true. This standard is lower than the one used in criminal courts.
Answer: A BOI is usually composed of three commissioned officers senior in rank to the service member. At least one board member should be from the same community or specialty when possible.
Answer: The board may consider documents, witness statements, service records, and other materials relevant to the alleged misconduct or performance issues. Rules of evidence are more flexible than in a court-martial.
Answer: A BOI may evaluate whether a service member remains eligible to continue service long enough to reach retirement. Administrative findings can influence whether a member separates before qualifying for retirement benefits.
Answer: The board makes recommendations regarding the appropriate characterization based on the service member’s overall record and the issues under review. Possible characterizations include Honorable, General, or Other Than Honorable.
Answer: Yes, a service member may retain a civilian attorney to represent them during the BOI. The civilian lawyer can participate in examining witnesses and presenting evidence according to BOI procedures.
Naval Station Great Lakes sits along the western shore of Lake Michigan in northern Illinois. It is positioned between Chicago and Milwaukee, giving it access to major transportation corridors and large civilian communities. This location supports steady interaction between the installation and surrounding towns such as North Chicago and Waukegan.
The station experiences a Great Lakes climate with cold winters, lake-effect weather, and temperate summers. These conditions shape year-round training requirements and facility operations. The surrounding suburban-industrial region also provides a stable support network for military personnel.
The installation is a U.S. Navy hub centered on enlisted training and technical development. Its tenant commands reflect the Navy’s emphasis on preparing new sailors. The base’s structure supports both initial and follow-on training pipelines.
The station serves as the Navy’s sole enlisted boot camp and a major technical training center. Its mission focuses on transforming recruits into sailors and sustaining specialized skills. This role makes it a critical gateway for the Navy’s worldwide readiness.
The base hosts a substantial population of recruits, students, instructors, and permanent staff. Activity levels fluctuate based on training cycles and seasonal shipper flows. This creates a dynamic environment with continuous personnel movement.
Training operations dominate daily activity, ranging from basic indoctrination to advanced technical instruction. The base also supports command, administrative, logistics, and medical functions tied to the training mission. These elements contribute to consistent operational tempo.
Service members at Great Lakes may encounter UCMJ actions linked to training, personnel transitions, or command expectations. High turnover and structured instruction can lead to investigations or administrative processes. The setting shapes how such matters are initiated and managed.
The military defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington represent servicemembers stationed at Naval Station Great Lakes. Their work includes assisting personnel who encounter UCMJ-related challenges on the installation. This support is available to those assigned to or passing through the base.
Separation decisions can sometimes be appealed or challenged through boards for correction of military records. These processes are complex and success is not guaranteed.
Administrative separation can significantly affect veterans benefits, particularly if the discharge is characterized as General or Other Than Honorable. Some benefits may be reduced or denied entirely.
Waiving a Board of Inquiry means the service member gives up the hearing and accepts separation processing based on the written record. This often limits the ability to challenge evidence or present mitigating information.
Yes, a Board of Inquiry can recommend retention instead of separation. However, the final decision rests with the separation authority.
Command recommendations carry substantial weight in Board of Inquiry proceedings. Board members often consider the command’s assessment of risk, leadership trust, and unit impact.
