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

ex-SR, USN 
Docket No. ND00-00150

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991112, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000727.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I do not believe the discharge given was improper at the time.  The fault was all my own.  However, there are isolated offenses.  I've never been charged with anything before or after this incident in my civilian or military life and I do not feel that this discharge should follow me for the rest of my life.

Also, as you can see in documents 2, 3, and 4, I was at the top of my class in Basic Enlisted Submarine School and I know that I can achieve this in any training or schools the Marine Corp has to offer me.

To clear up the last sentence, I am currently trying to enlist in the Marine Corp and I need an RE code of 3 or better to be considered.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Applicant's personal statement dated November 1, 1999
Copy of Honorman Award
Copy of citation for 25 March 1996 through 24 April 1996
Copy of certificate dated 24 April 1996
Explanation of discharge evaluation
Page 2 of Evaluation Report & Counseling Record dated 5 August 1996
Copy of DD Form 214.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	950724 - 960107	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  960108		Date of Discharge:  961009

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  09  02
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  88

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)	Behavior:  1.00 (1)		OTA:  1.20	5.0 evals

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

960109:	Retention warning.  You are being retained in the Naval service, despite your defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by your failure to disclose your preservice civil involvement:  Failure to stop, October 1995.  However, any further deficiencies in performance or conduct may result in processing for administrative separation.

960627:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Operate a vehicle, to wit: a passenger car, while drunk on 16 June 1996, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Incapacitated for the performance of his duties as a result of wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drugs on 19 June 1996.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $400 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days.  Forfeiture of $200 per month suspended for 4 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

960627:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 111 (Drunken or reckless driving), and 134 (Drunkenness  - Incapacitation for performance of duty through prior wrongful overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or any drug)), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

960710:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Alcohol abuse 19Jun96, 1-3 times per week, ashore off duty, military police.  CAAC recommended Level II treatment.  Physician found applicant not dependent and recommends Level II treatment.  Commanding officer recommends separate not via VA hospital.

960710:	Applicant offered Level II treatment.  Applicant declined treatment.
 
960723:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidence by violation of UCMJ, Article 111 (Drunken driving) and Alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, when he refused to participate in Level II Alcohol treatment.

960723:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

960827:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense and Alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): SA (applicant) was awarded punishment at Commanding Officer's Nonjudicial Punishment for violation of the UCMJ, Article 111 (Drunken or reckless driving) and Article 134 (Drunkenness - incapacitation for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor or any drug).  SA (applicant) was recommended for Level II Alcohol Treatment by a CAAC evaluation which he declined, thereby negating his potential for further Naval service.  SA (applicant's) conduct is detrimental to good order and discipline in the Naval service.  I strongly recommend a discharge characterized as Other Than Honorable.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 961009 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant states, although his misconduct was his fault, they were isolated offenses and he is trying to reenlist into the Marine Corps.  The applicant was punished for operating a vehicle while drunk and incapacitated for the performance of his duties.  He was recommended for Level II treatment but refused to participate.  The applicant showed no desire to correct his misconduct and in the opinion of the commanding officer, showed no potential for further Naval service.  Additionally, the Board is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge for the purpose of allowing him/her to rejoin any branch of military service.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 111, for Drunken driving, if adjudged at a Special or General Court-Martial.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at "afls14.jag.af.mil".

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:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023