Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301766

Original file (ND1301766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CSSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20130826

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:       ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20081024 - 20090915     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20090916     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20110323      Highest Rank/Rate: CSSN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.75

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20100314 :      Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: On or about 1800 on 12 February 2010
         Specification 2: On or about 03 March 2010 to 11 March 2010
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article (False official statements)
         Awarded: 45 DAYS Suspended: (15 DAYS)

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

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”
         “ 10 MAR 03 TO 10 MAR 10 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, PERS-312A, 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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until 17 August 2011, 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 and 107 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant contends his serious offense was committed almost one year prior to his discharge, and he was discharged for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure.
2.       The Applicant contends he was discharged for failing to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, and since they are religious meetings, he should not have been required to attend them.

Decision

Date : 20 1 4 0320             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 discharg e 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 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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 2 specific ation s), Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 1 specific ation ), and Article 107 (False official statements , 1 specification ). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant and his alcohol rehabilitation failure , 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-Mar tial Convening Authority review .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his serious offense was committed almost one year prior to his discharge, and he was discharged for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. After completing Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment in February 2011, the Applicant stated his intention to continue to use alcohol and declined aftercare treatment, which qualifies as an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. His command then determined he was no longer fit to serve and notified him of administrative separation processing for Misconduct (Serious Offense) and Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. Per the Naval Military Personnel Manual, when notifying a member of administrative discharge processing, the member must be notified of all applicable bases for separation. With the Applicant’s violation of UCMJ Articles 91 and 107 in March 2010, he met the requirements for separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense). The final decision on the primary basis for separation is determined by the Separation Authority, who was Commanding Officer, USS JOHN C. STENNIS. He determined Misconduct (Serious Offense) should be the primary basis for separation, which is in accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual that states that misconduct takes precedence over other bases for separation. The NDRB noted an error on Block 28 of the Applicant’s DD Form 214, which incorrectly listed Misconduct (Serious Offense) and Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. Only one basis should be listed, and the NDRB will recommend to Commander, Navy Personnel Command that the DD Form 214 be corrected and reissued to show the primary basis of separation of Misconduct (Serious Offense). Relief denied.

Issue 2: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends he was discharged for failing to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, and since they are religious meetings, he should not have been required to attend them. A review of the records shows the Applicant indicated an intention to continue drinking alcohol after receiving Level III treatment , and he also declin ed to participate in aftercare treatment, thus meeting the requirements for discharge due to Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. Alcoholics Anonymous meetings are not specific to any particular faith and are considered part of aftercare treatment programs. 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 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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-00737

Original file (MD02-00737.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

MD02-00737 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020426, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. st Marine Division (Rein), Camp Pendleton, CA) directed the Applicant's discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason alcohol rehabilitation failure. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 950908 general (under...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801620

Original file (ND0801620.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000473

Original file (ND1000473.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks an upgrade in his characterization of service at discharge in order to continue his education and to re-enter military service as an officer.2. Based on the arrest and conviction for the second DUI, the Applicant’s command determined that the Applicant was an Alcohol Treatment Failure in accordance with Article 1910-152 of the...
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 | 2009_Navy | ND0902303

Original file (ND0902303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware submission of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the NDRB on a case-by-case basis.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00230

Original file (ND01-00230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. This office, acting as counsel, has reviewed the naval records of the above named applicant and respectfully submits them for consideration in accordance with Department of Defense Directive Number 1332.28 E4.3 EQUITY In the course of a discharge review, it is determined that relief is warranted based upon consideration of the applicant's service...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400159

Original file (MD1400159.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20010629 - 20020602Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20020603Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20040728Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)26 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:66MOS: 6531Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800141

Original file (MD0800141.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. The documentation provided by the Applicant was not sufficient to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge and the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001115

Original file (ND1001115.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Given the statement of the arresting officer, the SARP determined that the incident did involve alcohol, was alcohol related, and did violate the terms of the Applicant’s aftercare program, OPNAVINST 5350.4D, and Article 1910-152 of the MILPERSMAN.Based on this alcohol-related incident, the command and the medical officers determined the Applicant to be an Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment Failure; as such, processing for administrative separation was mandatory.9, the Applicant was notified...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101577

Original file (MD1101577.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20070214 - 20070304Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20070305Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20091125Highest Rank:Length of Service: Years Months21 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:57MOS: 6048Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301766

Similar Decisions