Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801073
Original file (ND0801073.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GSEFR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080424
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USAF (DEP): Discharged in 2001 for drug use. Active:
US N R (DEP) : 20010829 - 20011104                

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20011105      Period of E nlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20050210
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 06 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:
AFQT: 69 Highest Rank /Rate : GSEFN Evaluation M arks: Performance: 2.0 ( 4 ) Behavior: 2.0 ( 4 ) OTA: 2.38
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF : UA dates NFIR.

NJPs :    
20040513 : Art icle 86 (Unauthorized absence appointed place of duty ) .
Art icle 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order).
 Awarded : . Susp - . Suspension vacated 20040930.

20040930 : Art icle 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation).
Awarded : . Susp - .

S CMs :   

SPCMs:  

C C :      

Retention Warnings: .

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or 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 Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Service b enefits
2. Post service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20 08 0828             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE .

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 .

: ( ) The Applicant is requesting a discharge upgrade based on her post service employment record. 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 record of service is marred by 2 non-judicial punishments for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86, Article 92 (2 specifications). Both of these violations are considered serious in nature and could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial. The Applicant subsequently had 2 alcohol related incidents and she was referred to Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation o n 12 January 2005 . On 21 January 2005, the Applicant checked out of Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation against medical advice and was considered an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure at that point. The command took the necessary steps to administratively discharge her as an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure under guidance in the MILPERSMAN 1910-152.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews . Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card company’s or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements. The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.

The Applicant provided two character statements dated in April 2008 as documentation of post service accomplishments. To warrant an upgrade to “Honorable” the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served , the UCMJ violations involved , and the fact the Applicant refused the Alcohol Rehabilitation treatment offered by the Navy to help her overcome her addiction to Alcohol .

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




Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 27, effective 2 6 January 200 4 until 09 May 200 5 , Article 1910-152, SEPARATION BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE .
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 .
D. Character Reference Letter from T_ Olson Med Tech Manager, Springs Oaks Assisted Living Center Dated: 11 April 2008.

E. Character Reference Letter From O_ Nunley Day Care Manager, Nunley Family Day Care Dated 11 April 2008.




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, 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900722

    Original file (ND0900722.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade is not warranted.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and DD Form 293 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...

  • 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801001

    Original file (ND0801001.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. The Board determined based on the documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100213

    Original file (MD1100213.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801214

    Original file (ND0801214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the Applicants argument that he was wrongfully discharged nine days prior to his EAOS is also without merit since MILPERSMAN 1910 – 152 allows for separation of a member any time during their career if there is a determination of alcohol treatment failure.Based on a review of the evidence the Board determined an upgrade or change would be inappropriate. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800626

    Original file (ND0800626.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800894

    Original file (ND0800894.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201497

    Original file (MD1201497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801191

    Original file (ND0801191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20030416 - 20031209Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment:20031210Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070420Length of Service: Years Months11 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 46Highest Rank/Rate:YNSNEvaluationMarks:Performance: NFIR Behavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):(2)Periods of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800587

    Original file (MD0800587.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Commanding General determined the Applicant would be discharged with a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization due to Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. The Board determined that an impropriety had taken place during the processing of the Applicant, which led him to believe the least favorable discharge characterization he would receive was “Honorable.” Based on the propriety issue, the Board felt an upgrade to “Honorable” would be appropriate by a vote of 3-2.:() .The NDRB...