Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700114
Original file (ND0700114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ETSN, USN
ND07-00114
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20061101                                                Characterization Received: GENERAL
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT                                         Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-146

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. None submitted.

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .
Date: 20 071011                  Location: Washington D.C.

Discussion

 The Board noted that the Separation Authority’s action was ambiguous in regards to the reason for discharge. The Board determined that, based on the Applicant’s record and the assigned Separation Code, the appropriate reason for discharge was misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy meets acceptable standards of performance and conduct, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A general discharge is warranted when service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by at least 3 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 91, 92, 107 and 111 of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.

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)      20020209 - 20020324              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20020325      Years Contracted : , Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20050829
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 05 Mths 05 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:                AFQT: 75                   Highest Rank /Rate : ET3
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.5 ( 4 )       Behavior: 2.75 ( 4 )         OTA: 3.24
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL

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

20030313:        Naval Medical Center, San Diego, Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department: Applicant referred for evaluation due to public intoxication on base 20030307. Patient admits to drinking 6 beers in a 2 hour period, “had more than I intended to drink,” can’t recall being checked by EMTs. Impact treatment recommended.
         Diagnosis: Axis I: No diagnosis based on unavailable information .
         Axis II: No dx
         
20030731         CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 111 - Driving under the influence of alcohol.
         Awarded - FOP ($798.00) for (2 months); Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).

20031002 :        CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 91 - Failure to obey a superior commissioned officer, Art. 92 - Failure to obey a general regulation, Art. 107 - False official statement.
         Awarded - FOP ($678.00) for (2 months); RIR (E-3); Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).

20040218:        Counseling and Assistance Center, USNH Guam, Alcohol and Drug Screening Program. Applicant referred due to ARI while on port visit to Singapore. Patient on liberty risk on port visit but did not comply with orders to abstain form ETOH consumption. Patient drank approximately 14 drinks in 4-hour time period. This is 3 rd ARI for the patient in approximately 7-8 months. Patient appears to meet 2 of 7 criteria for ETOH dependence. Recommend ASAM Level II Abuse Treatment. Rule out dependency.

20040625:        Naval Medical Center, San Diego, Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program. Applicant completed four weeks of treatment in the Intensive Outpatient Treatment Program (IOP). His prognosis is fair with pro-active command and family support and adherence to the SARP recommended continuing care plan.
         
20050817:        CO's NJP. No further information found in service record. [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/604, Awards.]
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING OFFICER, USS PELELIU (LHA 5) ( 20050825 )
 Reason for discharge directed:           -
        
         -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20050829

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), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

 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 s 92, Failure to obey order or regulation; 107, False official statements; and 111 , Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft or vessel.

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 | ND0700131

    Original file (ND0700131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Improper2. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700773

    Original file (ND0700773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warnings, the award of two nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer), Article 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation), Article 107 (False official statement), Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle), Article 134 ( Drunkenness), Article 134 (False or unauthorized pass...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700956

    Original file (ND0700956.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700136

    Original file (ND0700136.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 discharger and characterization of his service. Awarded - FOP $200.00 -2 months; Restr - 30 days; Extra duties - 30 days.19991020: Retention Warning forfailure to obey a lawful written instruction (underage drinking).20000210: CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700827

    Original file (MD0700827.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 in light of the nature and seriousness of the Applicant’s misconduct, and that the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient to convince the Board that an upgrade was appropriate at this time.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700714

    Original file (MD0700714.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT Date: 20071205Location:Washington D.C.Representation: Discussion Issue 1: 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. 20031201 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20040104) SJA...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700964

    Original file (MD0700964.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - Restr for (14 days).20060602: Applicant voluntarily waives his right to an Administrative Discharge Board.20060619: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Separation Physical Diagnosis: Fit For Separation. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700397

    Original file (ND0700397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.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 three nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer),...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700744

    Original file (MD0700744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, after a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate in light of the nature and seriousness of the Applicant’s misconduct, and that the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient to convince the Board that an upgrade was appropriate at this time. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record...