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

 ex-FN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00801

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010522, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to Reduction in Force - or similar statement which deletes the negative connotation.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant designated the Oregon Department of Veterans Affairs as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011214.  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 narrative reason of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  HONORABLE/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3630550.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  Please consider changing my DD 214 to Reduction in Force (Block 28) vice Alcohol Rehab Failure.  I find this a negative statement which is, frankly, embarrassing. I have proven myself to be a very productive and worthy citizen and that, coupled with my service record warrants this change.

2.  The following issues are the reason I believe my discharge should be upgraded.  If you disagree, please explain I detail why you disagree.  The presumption of regularity that night normally permit you to assume that the service acted correctly in characterizing my service does not apply to my case because of the evidence I am submitting.

ξ   My average conduct and efficiency rating/behavior and proficiency marks were good
ξ   I received letters of recommendations.
ξ   My record of promotions showed I was generally a good service member.
ξ   I have been a good citizen since discharge.
ξ   I tried to serve and wanted to, but just couldn't or wasn't able to
ξ   The only person that wanted me discharged was the CO.

Documentation

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

Petitioner's Statement (3 pages)
Character Reference letter (undated) from D_ K. S_
Letter of Recommendation, dated 8 Nov 93, from LCDR T_ V. F_, Auxiliaries Officer, USS CARLVINSON (CVN 70)
Character Reference letter, dtd 30 Oct 93, from MMC D.L. E_, USN, USS CARL VINSON. 
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	910628 - 910904	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910905		Date of Discharge:  931108

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  02  04
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  37

Highest Rate:  FN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.5 (2)	Behavior:  3.2 (2)		OTA:  3.6

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

HONORABLE/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3630550.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

920511:	USS CARL VINSON, Med Dept:  19 year old male 7 months active duty self referred strong desire to get out of Navy.  Joined Navy because kick out apartment, lost girlfriend, lost job - late, intoxicated, kicked out of high school - show up drunk twice - all alcohol related - felt Navy would give him money, training.  Feels trapped in Navy, drinking coke and whiskey, rum - 1/2 fifth at night.  Marked tolerance, unknown withdrawal - gets anxious on duty weekends…………..2 nights ago was driving while intoxicated, drove car off road smashed rear end.  No police involvement………….Denied current suicidal ideation, just wanted to be away from work.
	Assessment:  1 - Suicidal ideation, 2 - Alcohol dependence psychologic.
	Plan:  1 - Consult MHC - today.  2 - DAPA referral.

920511:	Mental Health Clinic:  Pt referred MHC by command for suicidal ideation.  Pt is 19 year old, drank heavily over weekend and in an MVA, crashed the near end of his car into a tree stump due to making a fast a turn.  As he drank on the weekend, he held a knife to his chest and scraped himself with it.  He didn't cut himself with it.  He reported it to his command later.  Pt doesn't believe he has a drinking problem and does not want treatment for alcoholism.  He does have a past history of drinking that got him in trouble in school.  Pt is not adjusting to USN life and feels it was a mistake to join.  He wants out of USN.  He says he isn't suicidal or homicidal and doesn't use drugs.
	Impression:  1 - Personality Disorder (NOS) with some antisocial background.  Alcohol abuse.  Does not appear psychotic.  No substance abuse.  2.  Alcohol Dependence - refusing treatment.
	Recommendation:  1 - No imminently suicidal or homicidal.  2 - Appears to be fit for duty.  3 - Not appropriate fro MH Ward.  4 - Command should consider for discharge as unsuitable for duty due to his refusal for treatment for alcoholism and for his personality disorder.  Future drinking could result in further suicidal ideation and death.

920724:	USS CARL VINSON, Med Dept:  Pt evaluated, does not require hospitalization for detoxification, is not physiologically dependent, is psychologically dependent, is motivated for counseling is motivated for military service.  Recommend Level III treatment.

921103:	Admission to NAVHOSP Oakland (ARD):  Pt presents history of alcohol dependence and abuse.  Pt underwent 4 weeks Level III treatment.  
Discharge diagnosis:  Alcohol dependence with rehab therapy.
Pt completed 3 weeks and four days of a 6 week in-patient program .  For the most part he was passively accepting of his treatment and tentatively accepting of his alcoholism.  He admits that he is an alcoholic and cannot drink.  He also stated that he wished to stay in the Navy.  It was not made clear to the staff whether the pt was sincerely concerned with his disease or was only in treatment to satisfy the requirement of finishing treatment.  He did participate some but as unable or unwilling to deal with several underlying issues which may have serious influences on his ability to remain sober.  This apparent selectivity of treatment goals is not conducive to group process and works against group recovery.  Since the pt chose to focus on alcoholics anonymous and feels that the ARD has nothing further to offer him in spite of evidence to the contrary.  The staff decided to terminate him from treatment.  The following aftercare plan was developed by the pt and is counselor.
Medication:  Antabuse 250mg.  
Pt Instruction:  Attend minimum of 4 AA meetings/weeks for 1 year.
Participates command level at CAAC.  Report command DAPA nlt two days to return to command.  Returned to full duty.

921203:	Discharge from NAVHOSP Oakland (ARD).

930819:	USS CARL VINSON, Med Dept:  Pt left on pier by friends and turned in by roving patrol.  Contacted by OOD to get pt at/on the brow.  Pt is unconscious.  Unconscious male, strong odor of alcohol on breath, will only respond to painful stimuli (sternal rub), 3 episodes of emesis.
	Assessment:  Acute alcohol intoxication.
	Plan:  1 - Drunk Watch, 2 - Return to medical if any questions or problems.

930908:	DAAR:  Identified by military police, positive for alcohol abuse, ashore-off duty, screened by CAAC, not eligible for rehabilitation (member was afforded Level III treatment), he subsequently had another alcohol related incident, recommend separation not via VA hospital.

930921:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  UA from his place of duty on 93AUG19; violation of UCMJ Article 134: wrongful overindulgence in liquor or drugs.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $75 per month for 2 months (suspended $75 for 1 month), restriction and extra duty for 15 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

931030:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with least favorable characterization of service as general reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure as evidenced by failure to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete a Level II or Level III rehabilitation treatment program.

931030:	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.  Member did not object to separation.

940308:	Commanding Officer, USS CARL VINSON, advised BUPERS of member's discharge on 8 November 1993 with an honorable by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure as evidenced by his failure to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete Level II or Level III rehabilitation treatment program. 

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 931108 with an honorable due to alcohol rehabilitation failure (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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 (C and D).

Issue 1.   The applicant was discharged for failure to complete alcohol rehabilitation treatment.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes why the applicant was discharged.   To change the narrative reason would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The evidence the applicant submitted lend credence to the applicant’s award of an honorable characterization of service by his command.  They do not mitigate the reason for the applicant’s administrative separation.  To change the narrative reason on this issue would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 05 Mar 93 until
 21 Jul 94, Article 3630550, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE.

B.  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.  

C.  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.

D.  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 "afls10.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 Room 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023