Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100035
Original file (ND1100035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101006
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)        20050104 - 20051002     Active:            2005 1003 - 20071029

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20071030     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080930      Highest Rank/Rate: MM2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 86
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 1.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.48

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20080724 :      Article (Drunken operation of a motor vehicle)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling:

C IVILIAN ARREST:

- 20080722 :      Charges: Driving under the influence of alcohol BAC . 20 [ Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 20080905.]

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

          “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 051003 UNTIL 071 0 29 ”
          “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.






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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation:           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009,
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 111 , Drunken driving .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1 .       Applicant contends his r ecord of service warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable.
 2 .        Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because his misconduct would not have occurred had he received the help he requested to deal with the death of his friend.
3.       Applicant contends his d ischarge was inequitable , because he was punished for doing the right thing.
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0119             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

 The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings or trials by court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) . However, it did include one civilian arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol and one non-judicial punishment for violation of the UCMJ : Article 111 ( Drunken driving, 1 specification). Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his record of service warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 111 (Drunken driving) is one that warrants separation regardless of performance, grade, or time in service. This usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The Applicant was found guilty of drunken driving. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. After considering additional facts and circumstances unique to this case, including a letter from his former Division Officer, the NDRB found the characterization of service awarded the Applicant to be inequitable and not consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. As a result, the NDRB voted 3-2 to upgrade the Applicant’s characterization of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions). Partial r elief granted. Full relief to Honorable was not granted, because misconduct did occur.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because his misconduct would not have occurred had he received the help he requested to deal with the death of his friend. Regardless of whether or not his command expeditiously responded to his request for alcohol treatment, the Applicant was responsible for his actions and knew that driving under the influence of alcohol was illegal. In fact, he had previously completed alcohol rehabilitation treatment. There is nothing to indicate that the Applicant was unable to control his behavior or was not responsible for his conduct. T he NDRB determined that this issue was not grounds for relief. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because he was punished for doing the right thing. After a thorough review of the available evidence , t he Board is convinced that for the incident of 6 January 2008 , the Applicant did the right thing . However, the Applicant was not discharged for this incident. His July 2008 DWI arrest led to his discharge. T he NDRB determined that this issue was not grounds for relief. Relief denied.


Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Board determined that the unique circumstances surrounding the misconduct warranted partial relief. Full relief to Honorable was not granted , because the misconduct did occur . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.
Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; 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 companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. 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 accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000437

    Original file (MD1000437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” 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 no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101103

    Original file (ND1101103.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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901612

    Original file (ND0901612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant is seeking better employment opportunities2. ” 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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000962

    Original file (ND1000962.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority approved the Command’s recommendation for discharge and designated that the basis for separation would be MISCONDUCT (Serious Offense), having determined that the evidence of record supported both reasons for discharge, but that discharge for MISCONDUCT (Serious Offense) was the more appropriate basis for the Applicant’s administrative separation. The Separation Authority reviewed the evidence of record and the gravity of the miscondcut and directed the Applicant be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200811

    Original file (ND1200811.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, not receiving additional help does not excuse or mitigate his subsequent alcohol-related misconduct. ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001764

    Original file (ND1001764.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s repeated alcohol rehabilitation failures after receiving Level II and Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment, to include two DUIs subsequent to completing treatment (3 career incidents involving driving while under the influence), and a previous COMNAVPERSCOM waiver of administrative separation(Feb 2006), his command processed for separationin accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN). On 24 Oct 2008, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300980

    Original file (ND1300980.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001383

    Original file (MD1001383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was extremely fortunate to have only received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, as his conviction for spousal abuse and driving under the influence are considered serious offenses that warranted a punitive discharge from a court-martial or an administrative discharge with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701272

    Original file (MD0701272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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) The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301755

    Original file (ND1301755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to receive service and G.I. 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...