Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300356
Original file (ND1300356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ETSR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20121205
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)        20040713 - 20041102     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20041103     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20081007      Highest Rank/Rate: ETSN
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 05 D ays
 Education Level:        AFQT: 80
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.16

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20080202 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Dereliction in the performance of duty
         Specification 2: Failure to obey other lawful order
          Awarded: Suspended:

- 20080621 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 2 specifications )
         Article (General A rticle - disorderly conduct)
         Awarded: Suspended: [Extracted from Report and Disposition of Offense(s) dated 20080811.]

- 20080811 :      Article (Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    CC:

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20080810 :      Charges: Driving und er the influence (DUI).

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20080202 :      For failure to obey other lawful order and dereliction in the performance of duties.

- 20080621 :      For disorderly conduct and willful disobedience of warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

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 s 91, 92, 111, and 134.



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on in-service conduct.
2.       The Applicant contends alcoholism was a mitigating factor in his misconduct.
3 .       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration for an upgrade to Honorable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0822             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. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVP ERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Just ice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ), Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications ), Article 134 ( General A rticle, disorderly conduct ), and Article 111 ( Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel ) . 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 a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on in-service conduct. The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. The characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends alcoholism was a mitigating factor in his misconduct. While the Applicant may feel his alcohol dependency was a contributing factor to his misconduct, it does not mitigate his disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the Naval Service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further service. Alcohol consumption is never a rationale or an acceptable excuse for inappropriate conduct, misconduct, or poor judgment. The Board concluded the command acted appropriately, equitably, and properly in processing the Applicant for separation. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. After a careful review of the Applicant’s post-service documentation and official service records, and taking into consideration his testimony, the testimony of his witness, and the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined relief is warranted based on equitable grounds. By majority rule, the NDRB voted to upgrade the characterization of service to Honorable but not change the narrative reason for separation. Relief granted.





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 However, based on post-service conduct, the awarded characterization of service shall but t he narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149. Their website can be found at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm . 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901972

    Original file (MD0901972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When this was considered along with his prior outstanding service record, the NDRB found relief to be warranted on equitable grounds.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101199

    Original file (MD1101199.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB is not authorized to upgrade a discharge for pay recoupment.Issue 3: (Decisional) (Equity/Propriety) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. 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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100897

    Original file (MD1100897.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” 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. Reenlistment/RE-code : Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401213

    Original file (ND1401213.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001299

    Original file (ND1001299.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 the 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 personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001146

    Original file (MD1001146.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decisional issues: The Applicant contends that he warranted an Honorable characterization of service at discharge vice the General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge characterization that he received if his proficiency and conduct marks were corrected administratively. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and his service and medical record entries, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101588

    Original file (MD1101588.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined relief based on this issue was not warranted. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901278

    Original file (MD0901278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiates or relates directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found The Applicant remains eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100366

    Original file (MD1100366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. In light of the unique circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s misconduct and administrative separation, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s characterization of service will change to Honorable, and the narrative reason for separation will change to Secretarial Authority. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301120

    Original file (ND1301120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...