Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101642
Original file (ND1101642.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110623
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)        20020508 - 20020522     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020523     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040527      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 05 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 40
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.7 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.89

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM SSDR

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : 1
- 2003 1017 :      Article 128 (Assault , o/o 20030926 )
         Awarded: RIR (to E-1) FOP RESTR EPD Suspended: RIR (suspend 6 months)

S CM : NONE                 S PCM: NONE                 C C : NONE

Retention Warning Counseling : 1
- 20031017 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 128 (A ssault ) .

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:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 28 April 2005, Article 1910-152, SEPARATION BY REASON OF ALCOHOL REHABILITATION.
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.        Applicant contends command impropriety, harassment, and disrespect contributed to his misconduct and subsequent Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0 904             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : NONE

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 included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning and one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 128 (Assault , on or about 26 September 2003 ). The Applicant was administratively processed for separation by his command due to his failure to participate and disruptive behavior while assigned to an intensive outpatient treatment prog ram for alcohol abuse/dependence . When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 20 May 2004 , the Applicant exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and s ubmit a written statement , but waived his right to a General Court - Martial Convening Authority Review . The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative separation board. On 26 May 2004, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer notified the Commander, Navy Pers onnel Command, of the Applicant’ s administrative separation from the Navy. His letter contained the following comments: “(The Applicant) is being separated due to Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. (The Applicant) ha d an alcohol - related incident in September 2003 and was awarded CO’s nonjudicial punishment on 17 October 2003. (The Applicant) was screened by the Command DAPA, Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program, Naval Hospital Lemoore, and a medical officer and was diagnosed with alcohol abuse with intensive outpatient treatment as recommended treatment program. (The Applicant) enrolled in intensive outpatient treatment on 26 April 2004 and was subsequently terminated on 3 May 2004 due to both his failure to participate in sessions and to disruptive behavior. ” The Applicant was discharge d from the Navy on 27 May 2004.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends command impropriety, harassment, and disrespect contributed to his misconduct and subsequent Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. The NDRB is not an investigative body, and allegations of command legal or administrative impropriety should be made to the Naval Inspector General ’ s Office. Allegations notwithstanding, the Board conducted a detailed review of the Applicant’s records to determine whether his discharge met the pertinent standards for propriety and equity. After careful consideration of all the available documentation, the Board could find no evidence to support the Applicant’s claim of command impropriety. Further, in addition to the Commanding Officer ’s administrative separation notification comments mentioned above, the Applicant’s service record contained performance evaluations with the following remarks: ( Evaluation Report, dated 1 August 2002-15 July 2003 ), the Reporting Senior stated : “(The Applicant) is a skilled and knowledgeable Sailor with great potential. However, his lack of motivation and inconsistent attitude has prevented him from making any real progress toward achieving his Plane Captain qualification…Demonstrated lack of maturity and po o r judgment on several occasions while in an off-duty status. He lost two military identification cards and also had two alcohol related incidents within a five-month period .” Per the Naval Military Personnel Manual, w hen a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under H onorable conditions. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Sailors , regardless of his grade or length of service, and falls short of w hat is required for an upgrade in the characterization of service. Accordingly, the NDRB determined this issue to be without merit and did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted. 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 the administrative separation p rocess, 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. 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | MD1000839

    Original file (MD1000839.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the report noted that the Applicant admitted to having “four (4) alcohol related blackouts, ten (10) incidents of passing out, and ten (10) fights/altercations.” The Applicant was diagnosed as AXIS I: Alcohol Abuse (Suspect Dependence) and recommended for continued abstinence from alcohol and Level II Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment.In the 28 Oct 1998 Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Base Quantico, endorsement of the Applicant’s administrative separation package, the CO states...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700712

    Original file (MD0700712.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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 960725 UNTIL 000816 ” “ NONE”The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102109

    Original file (ND1102109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Even though he contends that he has been sober and trouble-free since leaving the Navy (though no documentation was provided), Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure is the most accurate narrative reason for separation that describes why the Applicant was separated from the Navy.Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. ” Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001171

    Original file (ND1001171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a detailed review of the Applicant’s discharge package and supporting documentation, coupled with a review of the medical records and alcohol treatment program documentation, the NDRB determined that the Applicant was an Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment program failure, that processing for separation was mandatory, and that the discharge was proper as issued. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000738

    Original file (ND1000738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks upgrade to obtain G.I. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand administrative separation 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 | ND0600731

    Original file (ND0600731.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). No indication of appeal in the record.021210: Reduction to E-3 and forfeiture of $734.00 awarded and suspended on 021119 vacated due to continued misconduct.021217: Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department Diagnoses: AXIS I: Alcohol dependence. Applicant should: 1.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900128

    Original file (ND0900128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001258

    Original file (ND1001258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities as regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101630

    Original file (ND1101630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for the G.I. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800784

    Original file (MD0800784.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Furthermore, the NDRB notes the Applicant’s previous request for clemency filed on 22 November 2004 does not mention PTSD as the basis for that clemency request. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t