Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900098
Original file (ND0900098.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HM3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081008
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US A       UNKNOWN - 19890816      Active:            19900626 - 19921111
         USNR (DEP)        19890817 - 19900219
         USNR (DEP)        19900625

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19921112     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19941110      Highest Rank/Rate: HM3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 29 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 53
Evaluation M arks: Performance: 3.9 ( 3 ) Behavior: 3.9 ( 3 ) OTA: 3.93

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : S CM : SPCM: C C : Retention Warning Counseling :

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 :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 9, effective 22 July 1994 until 2 October 1996),
Article 3630550, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Narrative reason inequitable because there was no alcohol related incident or other adverse actions.
2. Post service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0212             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because there was no alcohol related incident or other adverse action in 48 months of service. The Applicant has requested the n arrative reason be changed to E nd of A ctive O bligated S ervice (EAOS) . 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 medical record reflects he was evaluated on 01 February 1994 , diagnosed as alcohol dependent and recommended for Level III treatment. The Applicant’s Problem Summary L ist included in his medical record contains an ent ry dated February 1994, indicating the Applicant was d iagnos ed a s alcohol dependent and in a recovery program . Additionally, the Ap plicant provided a personal statement wherein he admitted to , and was seen , drinking alc o hol at a party after being placed in an aftercare program ; this action constitutes an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure .

In the absence of the Applicant’s administrative separation records and incomplete medical records , the Board has applied the p resumption of regularity in this case in determining there was a sufficient basis for separation due to alcohol rehabilitation failure . The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any documenta tion to support the contention he was intimidated or forced to attend the alcohol rehabilitation program. Additionally, t he Applicant has not provided any documentation to support the contention that he did not have an alcohol related incident. The Applicant’s current statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Thus, the Board finds there was a sufficient basis for separation due to alcohol rehabilitation failure. Since no other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged, a nd he did not completed his enlistment contract , a change to EAOS would be inappr opriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends since being discharged he has become an upstanding membe r of society, has a stable family life and held the same job as a plumber for 10 years until he was recently laid off . He is also a member of the National Guard and has submitted several character references and in-service records for the Board’s consideration. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, since the Applicant has already received an honorable discharge an upgrade in his discharge charactyerization is not possible. For the edification of the Applicant, outstanding post service performance is not a basis for changing the narrative reaso n.

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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901405

    Original file (ND0901405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a review of the Applicant's record of service, the Board has made the following determinations: 1) there was sufficient evidence to separate the Applicant due to civilian conviction, 2) the commanding officer acted within his authority in discharging the Applicant prior to the expiration of his enlistment, and 3) an upgrade was not warranted based on the seriousness of the offense committed by the Applicant and his failure to comply with the aftercare program for alcohol...

  • 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1300465

    Original file (ND1300465.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his Separation Code should be JBK vice JGH. There is nothing in the service record to refute the presumption that the Separation Code of JGH or the narrative reason of Non-Retention on Active Duty were inappropriate, and the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not show that his Separation Code and narrative reason were incorrect. ” Additional...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301740

    Original file (MD1301740.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800873

    Original file (ND0800873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19980427 - 19980603Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19980604Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20051122Length of Service: Yrs Mths19 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 45/64Highest Rank/Rate:DT3EvaluationMarks:Performance: 3.9(9) Behavior:2.9(9)OTA: 3.42Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):,,,,Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101973

    Original file (ND1101973.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20050517 - 20060109Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060110Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090413Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 04 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 54EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(3)Behavior:3.3(3)OTA: 3.66Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001933

    Original file (MD1001933.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Decisional Issue: (Clemency/Equity) CLEMENCY NOT WARRANTED. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000361

    Original file (ND1000361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 May 2009, the Applicant’s command was granted authority to discharge him within 10 days of receiving the discharge letter with a characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) for commission of a serious offense. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400440

    Original file (ND1400440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to:SUFFICIENT SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19871027 - 19880906Active: 19880907 - NFIR 19960906 - NFIR Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20020710Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: Years21ExtensionDate of Discharge:20070118Highest Rank/Rate:MT1Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 9 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001698

    Original file (ND1001698.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Even though the Applicant said his commanding officer recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, the Separating Authority determined that an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge was warranted.The Applicant contends he completed his full four years of service and wants his discharge characterization upgraded. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...