ex-AR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20080723
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN 3630600

Applicant’s Request:  Characterization change to:  
		       Narrative Reason change to:  

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19950511 - 19950621  		Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  19950622	 Period of Enlistment:  Years   Extension	Date of Discharge:  19971121
Length of Service:  Year     Months   29 Days	Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  48
Highest Rank/Rate: 	AN	Evaluation Marks: Performance:	2.8 (5)	Behavior: 2.0 (5)	OTA: 2.6
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	, , , 

Periods of UA/CONF: 

NJP:  
- 19961130:  Article 86 (UA)
                     Awarded: NFIR   Suspended:  

- 19970514:  Article 86 (UA)
                     Awarded: NFIR   Suspended:  

- 19970730:  Article 86 (UA)
                     Awarded:  NFIR   Suspended: NONE

- 19970912:  Article 86 (UA, 2 specifications)
                     Article 92 (Failure to obey) 
                     Article 128 (Assault)
                     Awarded:  NFIR   Suspended: NONE

SCM:      SPCM:      CC:  

Retention Warnings:  
- 19970730:  For NJP

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:		Substance Abuse:			Criminal Records:	
	Family/Personal Status:		Community Service:		References:		
              Additional Statements:
                             From Applicant:  	From Representation:         	From Congress member:    

Related to Post-Service Period (cont):	

              Other Documentation (Describe): 

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 14, effective 3 October 1996 until 
11 December 1997), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. 

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, Articles 92 and 128.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  Alcohol/medical problems not treated.
2.  Unfair discharge.
Decision

Date:  20081030		Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

Discussion

:  (Equity)  RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant implies he was treated unfairly by his command because his command did not provide adequate treatment for his alcohol and mental problems.  The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs.  The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warning and four NJP for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):  Article 86 (UA), Article 92 (Failure to obey), and Article 128 (Assault).  Violations of UCMJ Article 92 and 128 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court martial.  The command did not pursue a punitive discharge and opted instead for an administrative discharge.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention the command treated him unfairly or that he had unresolved alcohol or mental issues.    

For the information of the Applicant, appropriate naval regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons, including medical.  There is nothing in the Applicant’s service or medical record, nor has he produced any evidence, that suggests he was not responsible for his actions.  Additionally, upon review of the available medical and service records there is nothing to indicate alcohol problems or medical issues beyond minor back pains.  Upon release from the service the Applicant’s only concern, as indicated on his report of medical assessment in his own handwriting, was to seek assistant from the VA to finish a root canal; this document was signed and dated 19 November 1997, 2 days before his discharge.

The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his characterization of discharge to “Honorable”.  When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under “Honorable” conditions.  An “Under Other Than Honorable” conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Board acknowledges the Applicant’s misconduct and determined the awarded characterization was appropriate; an upgrade would be inappropriate. 

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,   Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found   

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe that 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:  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.  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.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his 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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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