Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101815

Original file (ND1101815.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BM2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110726

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)        19950313 - 19950424     Active: 19950425 - 20000510 HON
                                    USN 20000511 - 20040509 HON
                                    USN 20040510 - 20070814 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070815     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100820      Highest Rank/Rate: BM1
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 06 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.75 ( 4 )       OTA: 3.5

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM GWOTSM NMCAM (3) GCM (4) OSR SSDR (12)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20 100715 :      Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, BAC 0.179)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EPD       Suspended:

S CM : NONE        SPCM: NONE        C C : NONE          Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note a dministrative error s on the original DD Form 214:

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL (3), GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL (4), OVERSEAS SERVICE RIBBON, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (12), BATTLE “E” RIBBON, ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, LETTER OF COMMENDATION (4 ), NAVY UNIT COMMENDATION ”
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 950425 UNTIL 070814 ”

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:                  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), Change 29, 23 November 2009 until Present, Article 1910-152, SEPARATION BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE OR MULTIPLE DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) / DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED (DWIs).

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.        The Applicant seeks a change in his RE Code and wants to be reinstated in the U.S. Navy with his rank restored.
2.       The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an incident that had no merit, and he was not pending charges at the time of his discharge.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0904             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 non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, BAC 0.179). The Applicant was administratively processed by his command for separation due to Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure (ARF) . When notified of administrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure, the Applicant exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board . The a dministrative b oard determined the preponderance of the evidence supported Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure and recommended that the Applicant not be separated from the U.S. Navy. However, the Separation Authority did not concur with the a dministrative b oard and separated the Applicant with a n Under Honorable Conditions (General) character of service.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his RE Code from RE-4 to RE-1 and wants to be reinstated in the U.S. Navy with his rank restored or at least be provided early retirement . 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records (B CNR ) 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 for reenlistment through a recruiter. Additionally, only the BCNR can take actions such as restoring rank or allowing early retirement. The NDRB is only authorized to examine the propriety and equity of a discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable and improper because it was based on an incident with no merit, and he was not pending charges at the time of his discharge. The Applicant completed Level II alcohol treatment on 05 Feb 1999. The Applicant was screened for alcohol abuse/dependence twice and found guilty of violation of Article 111 after he had completed alcohol treatment. His service clearly met the requirement for separation due to Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure per Article 1910-152 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) . Whether or not he was charged by the Government of Guam with DUI is irrelevant to the determination of being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. All that is necessary is for his command to determine that an alcohol-related incident occurred after receiving treatment. The Applicant was arrested for DUI with a BAC of 0.179 and was subsequently found guilty at NJP. Per the MILPERSMAN, characterization of service for separation due to ARF should be General unless Honorable is warranted. With the misconduct in his current enlistment, t he NDRB found the characterization of the his discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization given others in similar circumstances. 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 T herefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for 15 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 | MD1002349

Original file (MD1002349.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant was separated from the Marine Corps just prior to his end of active obligated service, which was midnight on 8 Aug 2009, with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct.In his endorsement of the Applicant’s administrative separation package, the Commanding Officer stated “ (Applicant) has repeatedly shown poor judgment and leadership as documented in his multiple couselings for failing to pass a PFT and being assigned to the Remedial...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000913

Original file (MD1000913.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation twice. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201650

Original file (MD1201650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100647

Original file (MD1100647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

I have reviewed the Senior Member’s report and agree with the board’s findings and recommendations that (the Applicant) be discharged from the United States Marine Corps with an other than honorable conditions characterization of service.’ ” On 10 Jul 2009, the Separation Authority concurred with the findings and recommendations of the Admin Board and directed that the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900999

Original file (MD0900999.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded...
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 | 2007_Navy | ND0701081

Original file (ND0701081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his service. 20030221: Applicant discharged. Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20030214 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Separation Authority (date): Commanding Officer, Navy Recruiting District Indianapolis...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901041

Original file (ND0901041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

He was charged with knowingly operating a motor vehicle on a suspended license.Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000183

Original file (ND1000183.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : After...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201586

Original file (MD1201586.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to have his RE-code changed.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge based on this issue. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101815

Similar Decisions