Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00468
Original file (ND03-00468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCDR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00468

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030131. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to secretarial authority. The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. The Applicant designated civilian counsel as the representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031229. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service and reason for discharge was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character and reason for the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ MISCONDUCT, authority: BUPERS ORDER 1682 of 17 Jun 02 and SECNAVINST 1920.6B.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. Whether Applicant’s alcohol abuse was the direct causation of alleged misconduct.”

“2. Whether Applicant was an impaired health care provider who should have been given treatment and supervision rather than disciplinary action.”

“3. Whether Applicant’s service was properly characterized given her duty performance.”

“4. Whether enough was done to rehabilitate Applicant prior to a Board of Inquiry.”

“5. Whether a Board of Inquiry was proper in view of the Applicant’s status as an impaired healthcare provider.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (Member – 1)
Three pages from Applicant’s Medical Record
Two pages from Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor Administrative Screening
R_ R_ ltr of Feb 15, 2001 concerning Thanksgiving incident
 Two Fitness Report &Counseling Records (Period 00AUG10 to 00FEB14 & 01NOV01 to 01JUL19)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR            890911 - 890922  To accept commission

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Appointment: 890923              Date of Discharge: 020731

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 12 10 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 31                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 16     

Highest Grade: LCDR

 Final Officer Performance Evaluation Averages : All officer performance reports were available to the Board for review.
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NAM, NUC, NDSM(2), SWASM(2), HSM, SSDR, N&MCSR, KLM (Saudi Arabia), Flag LoC

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: BUPERS ORDER 1682 of 17 Jun 02 and SECNAVINST 1920.6B.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

010514:  Completed Level II alcohol rehabilitation treatment at ATF, Rota, Spain.

 010611:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 133: Conduct unbecoming an officer; violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 Specs): Drunk and Disorderly Conduct and Drunkenness – Incapacitation for performance of duty through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor.
         Award: Reprimand in writing.

010612:  Punitive Letter of Reprimand issued.

010613:  Applicant appealed the nonjudicial punishment.

010627:  Commander, Fleet Air Mediterranean, denied Applicant’s appeal.

010710:  Applicant’s Statement in response to Punitive Letter of Reprimand.

 010725:  CO, U.S. Naval Hospital, Naples, forwarded Applicant’s Report of Nonjudicial Punishment to CNPC recommending Application be required to show cause for retention.
010802:  Applicant’s Statement in response to NJP to show cause for retention.

 010813:  NJP (Admiral’s Mast) for violation of UCMJ, Article 133: Conduct unbecoming an officer; violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 Specs): Threat, communicating.
         Award: Punitive Letter of Reprimand, forfeiture of ½ months pay for 2 months (suspended for 6 months) and 14 days restriction.

010823:  Punitive Letter of Reprimand issued.

010828:  Applicant appealed her nonjudicial punishment.

010927:  Applicant advised of denial of appeal of her nonjudicial punishment.

020117:  Successfully discharged from alcohol abuse continuing care program.

020314:  Board of Inquiry: By votes of 3-0, the Board found that Applicant committed the misconduct alleged, failed to demonstrate acceptable qualities of leadership and that she failed to conform to prescribed standards of military deportment. By votes of 3-0, the Board recommended separating Applicant from the naval service with a general discharge. [Extracted from CNP’s ltr of 19 Apr 02.]

020419:  CNPC recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that Applicant be discharged with a general characterization by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

020611:  Assistant Secretary of the Navy (M&RA) approved Applicant’s discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020731 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1-5: Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of service in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s service. While she may feel that her alcohol abuse was a contributing factor, it does not mitigate the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, demonstrating she was unsuitable for further service. Her service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions for several offenses including conduct unbecoming an officer, communicating a threat and drunk and disorderly conduct . The Applicant’s discharge accurately characterizes her service and n o other narrative reason for separation could more clearly describe why she was discharged. Relief denied.

 T here 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 the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, an alcohol-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.








Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 25 Jan 01 until 21 Aug 02, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT
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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".

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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00639

    Original file (ND04-00639.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the narrative reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. Whether Applicant’s service was properly characterized given her duty performance. By votes of 3-0, the Board recommended separating Applicant from the naval service with a general discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00177

    Original file (MD03-00177.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00177 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021106, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Although Major L_ (Applicant) requests that he be separated with an Honorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service, he acknowledges that he may be separated with an Other Than Honorable characterization of service. The NDRB respects the fact the Applicant had...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00867

    Original file (ND04-00867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 010208: BUPERS recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that Applicant's request for resignation to avoid initiation of administrative separation processing, be approved and the Applicant be discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01231

    Original file (ND03-01231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01231 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030716. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “Reasons Satisfactory to SECNAV.” The Applicant requests a documentary record review. [EXTRACTED FROM SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.]

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00895

    Original file (MD04-00895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Recommended administrative separation. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violating orders, assault upon a fellow officer, and conduct unbecoming an officer.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01102

    Original file (ND03-01102.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 000502: CHNAVPERS recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that Applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious military or civilian offense. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700181

    Original file (ND0700181.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Incident occurring May-July 2004)Awarded - Written Reprimand.20041222: LTR of Reprimand issued to Applicant. Officer administrative separationDischarge Process Report of Misconduct: 20050121 Show Cause Recommendation: Applicant Response: ELECTECTED TO NOT SUBMIT COMMENTS Endorsing Recommendation: CONCUR WITH COMMANDING OFFICERdate: 20050308 Show Cause Decision: CNPCdate: 20050502 Applicant Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORD Applicant Election: NOT FOUND IN RECORD Board of Inquiry: NONE CNPC...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00603

    Original file (MD02-00603.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    000406: Applicant elected not to appeal the imposition of NJP, but elected to submit a request for resignation in lieu of administrative separation processing.000410: Punitive Letter of Reprimand issued to Applicant.000410: Applicant requested appeal of the non-judicial punishment.undated: Commanding Officer reported to CMC Applicant's non-judicial punishment and recommended Applicant be required to show cause for retention through the notification procedures, Applicant's request for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501020

    Original file (ND0501020.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As evidence of my success, I received a degree and a commission. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 010525: Applicant commissioned as an Ensign in the United States Navy Reserve.020402: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 2300 on 020402.020404: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0730 on 020404 (1 day).020421: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500419

    Original file (MD0500419.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By unanimous vote, the BOI recommended that that Applicant be separated from the naval service for the reasons listed above and the service be characterized as other than honorable.020211: Applicant’s request denied. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because the Board of Inquiry (BOI), which...