Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801476
Original file (ND0801476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MMFR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080707
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: US N R (DEP) 20001129 - 2001211         Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20001212     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20021126     Highest Rank/Rate: MMFN
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 15 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks: Performance: 3.0 ( 1 ) Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 ) OTA: 2.83

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20010404 :       Art icle 121 ( Larceny)
         Awarded : Susp ended :

- 20011219 :       Article 1 34 (Drunk and disorderly)
         Awarded: Susp ended :

- 20020815 :      Article 113 (Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout)
         Article 134 (Drunkenness)
          Awarded: Suspended:

- 20021119 :      Article 86 (UA)
          A rticle 134 (Drunkenness)
         Awarded: FOP Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20010404 : For poor military performance, to wit: larceny.
- 20011228: For completion of rehabilitation treatment program and requirements of aftercare program.

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):        20040608
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:   ND03-01395
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:                 Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:     
DD 214:         Service/ 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 Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

Applicant Testified:
Applicant Available for Questions:
Witnesses: Mr. Walker and Mr. Toppings
Observers: Cdr Rodrock and LCdr Johnson

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until
25 January 2004, 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 86 (U A ) ; Article 113 (Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout) ; Article 121 (Larceny) and Article 1 34 (D isorderly conduct, d runkenness) .




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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Discharge does not accurately reflect his character of service.
2. Misconduct was due to mitigating circumstances (Alcohol).
3. Post s ervice conduct.

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 0318 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.

Discussion

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends his “General (Under Honorable Conditions) ” discharge does not accurately reflect his character of service and therefore he requests an upgrade to “Honorable”. 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 re cord of service was marred by two retention warnings and four NJP’s for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (U A) , Article 113 (Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout) , Article 121 (Larceny) and Article 1 34 (D isorderly conduct, d runkenness) . These are considered serious offenses which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court martial. The Applicant was in the military approximately 23 months and his misconduct occurred over a period of 19 months. The Applicant processed through boot camp and within a short period of time afterwards began non-stop misconduct which resulted in the above mentioned 4 NJP’s. This misconduct didn’t cease until discharge from the Navy. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The Board determined the awarded discharge accurately reflected the Applicant’s character of service and an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his alcohol dependency contributed to and mitigated his misconduct of record. The record shows alcohol was a contributing factor in 3 of the 4 NJP’s the Applicant was awarded. The Applicant had an alcohol incident on 24 October 2001 in which his Blood Alcohol Level (BAL) was 0.296 . Although this did not result in misconduct, it triggered the command to seek treatment for the Applicant. The Applicant was diagnosed as an alcohol abuser and was prescribed “ O utpatient ” treatment between 13 and 23 November 2001 . During the period of treatment, the Applicant had an other incident on 18 November 2001, which involved him dislocating his thumb by falling down some stairs at a night club. The Applicant ’ s BAL this time was 0 .308 when tested at the hospital. The Applicant completed treat ment , per his counseling remarks dated 28 November 2001.

On 19 December 2001, the Applicant was subject to his second NJP (first due to alcohol) from the incident that occurred on 18 November 2001. Over the next 11 months , the Applicant was subject to two more NJP’s, both of which involved alcohol. A review of his record indicates the Applicant repeatedly denied having problems with alcohol when discussing this issue with his doctors. The events that transpired during the Applicant’s career in the Navy w ere a direct result of the Applicant ’ s self-denial he ha d an alcohol problem and the Navy only diagnosing him as an alcohol abuser and not as being alcohol dependent. A lthough the Applicant may feel alcohol w as the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not be held acco untable for his actions due to alcohol use or abuse . The Board determined th e awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct merits an upgrade to an “Honorable” characterization of service. The Applicant provided two references from employers, K-Mart and U Street Parking Inc., to document his work history over the last c ouple years. The Applicant has been attending Alcoholic Anonymous (AA)


once a week since August 2008. On the Applicant’s behalf two witnesses (Mr. W . and Mr. T . ) appeared before the Board to give testimony on his progress in AA and his good standing within the community, which includes attending Bible study 3 to 4
times a week. The Board commends the Applicant on his progress in fighting his alcohol addiction and also applauds his commitment to his employer, community and church. Additionally, the Board was impressed with the fact both witness’ appeared on their own accord and not at the request of the Applicant; this is how highly they regard the Applicant. However, t he Board determined the Applicant’s post service efforts need ed to be more encompassing. T he characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was determined to be an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided did not warrant an upgrade to “Honorable”.
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


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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01166

    Original file (ND03-01166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401776

    Original file (MD1401776.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401776 (1)

    Original file (MD1401776 (1).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001465

    Original file (ND1001465.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401554

    Original file (MD1401554.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000955

    Original file (ND1000955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.The Applicant was recommended for separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for a Pattern of Misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801959

    Original file (MD0801959.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the Applicant’s contention is without merit and the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate. The awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon mental and physical abuse would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801923

    Original file (ND0801923.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge,based on a pattern of misconduct, was caused by his inability to arrive at work in a timely manner due to a lack of proper transportation for a period of time. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600826

    Original file (ND0600826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)Applicant’s statement undated PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19890608 -...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201769

    Original file (MD1201769.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...