Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801759
Original file (ND0801759.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SK3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080821
Characterization of Service Received: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19990329 - 19990824     Active:          19990825 - 20030424

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20030425      Period of Enlistment : Years Extension  Date of Discharge: 20071005
Length of Service: Years Months 11 D ays        Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 55
Highest Rank/Rate:       SK3       Evaluation Marks: Performance:   3.8 ( 5 )  Behavior: 2.6 ( 5 )        OTA: 3.40
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     (2) (3) ICM ACM ESWS
Periods of UA/CONF: SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warnings:

NJPs:
- 20070912 : Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation by not using his Squadron Arrive Alive Card)
 Awarded: Suspended:

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 Representation:     From Congress member:

Other Documentation (Describe):

                                    Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214. Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY. Commander, Navy Personnel Command 5720 Integrity Drive, Millington TN 38055 will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.








Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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.


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Unjust punishment.

Decision

Date: 20081204            Location: Washington D.C.        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

                                                      Discussion

: ( ) . The Applicant claims his punishment was unjust because although he was drinking he did not drive, yet he received the same character of service discharge, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, as the driver of vehicle who was charged with a DUI. 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 was marred by one NJP for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey an order by not using his Navy “ARRIVE ALIVE” card).

The Applicant requested an upgrade to his discharge characterization to “Honorable”. When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under “Honorable” conditions. A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military record. At the time of his NJP, the Applicant had served almost 8 years on active duty and was preparing for advancement to First Class Petty Officer. He had successfully completed an alcohol rehabilitation program and was aware his after care instructions prohibited him from drinking alcohol. Contrary to his treatment plan the Applicant chose not only to drink alcohol but allowed his friend, who was intoxicated, to drive. It should be noted the Applicant spent the evening drinking with friends and despite being the senior Sailor in the group failed to demonstrate the proper leadership when needed by allowing his friend to drive while intoxicated. The Applicant’s command felt this violation was a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Sailor of his age and years of experience and his conduct violated the Alocohol Rehabiliation Program rules; as a result he was awarded a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” discharge. The Applicant does not provide witness statements or any documentation to support his claim his punishment was unjust. A r eview of available records reveals nothing to indicate the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.

As noted above, the Applicant’s record was marred by only one NJP and no retention warnings, as such he does not rate a ‘Pattern of Misconduct’ discharge per BUPERSINST 1900.8A. The Board determined the Narrative Reason for Separation should be changed to “SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY”. Commander, Navy Personnel Command will be advised to issue an amended DD-214 to reflect this change.

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, provided 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 granted 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.
Employment/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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500646

    Original file (ND0500646.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Statement listed as enclosure on the Commanding Officer’s undated letter, but not found in service record. ]UNDATED: Commanding Officer, USS SHILOH informed the Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERS-832) of the Applicant's discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. FA K_'s (Applicant’s) recent NAVPERS 1070/613 warning advised him that any future deficiencies in conduct; violations of the UCMJ, or conduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600597

    Original file (ND0600597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. IMPACT treatment recommended.021107: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions.021107: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700983

    Original file (ND0700983.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20021111: Applicant reports for duty aboard USS STEPHEN W GROVES (FFG 29).20040229: Applicant awarded Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal (silver star in lieu of sixth award).20041228: NJP – Violation of UCMJ Article112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance). His continued use of a controlled substance goes against all Navy standards and can not be tolerated in the Navy or at this command. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700841

    Original file (ND0700841.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues: 1. 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: USNR (DEP) 20020420 - 20020702 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020703Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00421

    Original file (ND04-00421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00421 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040114. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800888

    Original file (ND0800888.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301622

    Original file (ND1301622.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants a change of his reentry (RE) code.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601081

    Original file (ND0601081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Reason for Discharge shall - .Summary of Service:Prior Service: Inactive: NONEActive: NONE Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000330Years Contracted: YRSDate of Discharge: 20040823Length of Service: 04Yrs 04 Mos 24 DaysTime Lost During This Period: Education Level: Age at this Enlistment: AFQT: 32Highest Rate/Rank:SK3Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):Performance: 3.4 (5)Behavior: 3.2 (5)OTA:3.33Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801478

    Original file (ND0801478.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00411

    Original file (ND00-00411.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MM1 (applicant) went to CO's NJP on board USS MCKEE (AS-41) 96NOV27, for Article 107, false official statement to XO, USS MCKEE, regarding his alleged affair with SK3 H_ and the adultery charge. In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board found that the applicant’s Commanding Officer has the authority to recommend administrative separation for any individual in his command who had committed misconduct. This is a non-decisional issue for the Board.