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

 ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00023

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010926, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable, the reason for the discharge be changed to Convenience of the government and RE-1 code.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing review in the Washington National Capital Region.  The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020517.  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 and reason for the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Alcohol Abuse - rehabilitation failure, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3630550.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  MY USE  OF ALCOHOL IMPAIRED MY ABILITY TO SERVE.

2.  MY ABILITY TO SERVE WAS IMPAIRED BY MY YOUTH AND IMMATURITY.

3.  I HAVE BEEN A GOOD CITIZEN SINCE BEING DISCHARGED.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
Applicant's ltr to the Board dtd Sep 20, 2001
CAC Therapist progress/prognosis dtd 2/01/99
York College Transcript (2 pages)
University of Pittsburgh Transcript
Character Reference ltr from employer, R_ S. W_, Progressive Insurance
Character Reference ltr from Branch Manager, Progressive Corp, dtd Mar 23, 2001
Letter from Progressive Companies concerning downsizing dtd May 23, 2001
Applicant's ltr to the Board dtd Oct 25, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	870812 - 870813	COG
	Active:   USN 		860924 - 870120	ELS
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	860731 - 860923	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  870814		Date of Discharge:  891222

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  04  09
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  88

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.2 (2)	Behavior:  2.7 (2)		OTA:  3.1

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  N&MCOSSR 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS(GENERAL)/Alcohol abuse - rehabilitation failure, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3630550.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

890731:	Drug and Alcohol Evaluation (Naval Hospital Yokosuka):  Evaluated while hospitalized on Ward 5B for detoxification.  Alcohol dependent, recommend Level III residential treatment.  

890817:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107:  false official statement, violation of UCMJ Article 86 (2 specs): unauthorized absence.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 months, correctional custody for 7 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890920:	Admitted to ARSD, NAVHOSP Yokosuka for treatment after being diagnosed alcohol dependent by clinical psychologist while hospitalized for detoxification at USNH Yokosuka.

890925:	Discharged from treatment due to unsatisfactory progress and recurrent rules violations.  Recommend administrative separation as rehabilitation treatment failure.

891017:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure as evidenced by failure to complete the Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Program.

891017:	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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.  Applicant did not object to the Separation.

891109:	Commanding officer advised CNMPC that applicant was discharged under honorable conditions (general) by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim):  "SA (Applicant) has had continuous behavioral problems particularly since his access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) was revoked by COMNAVSECGRU in August 1989.  His eligibility for SCI was removed when several significant facts, previously unreported by SA (Applicant), came to light while reviewing the results of his special Background Investigation.  It was learned that he had attempted suicide and been fired because of theft.  He was then given a psychiatric evaluation to determine his suitability to retain even his secret clearance.  During the course of this evaluation he denied any drug or alcohol abuse.  Although the evaluator concluded that SA (Applicant) was apt to be impulsive and become irritable with low provocation and that under episodes of stress he was likely to demonstrate emotional and impulsive behavior, he was found to be fit for full duty.  He unsuccessfully appealed for his clearance to COMNAVSECGRU in March 1989 and at that time was made available to the fleet for detailing.  SA (Applicant) refused to cooperate with PSD with regard to rating selection and subsequently received orders to report to the USS BUNKER HILL.  During overseas screening SA (Applicant) claimed alcohol addiction and dependency.  He was immediately admitted to the hospital for detoxification and screening.  SA (Applicant) disclosed a large number of alcohol related problems during screening and was diagnosed alcohol dependent by a clinica psychologist and was referred to SA/ARSD Level III treatment.  He did not, however, experience any symptoms of withdrawal during detoxification.  As a result of his assignment to Level III, he was disqualified by EPMAC from further overseas duty pending completion  of inpatient treatment.  SA (Applicant) reported for the six week in-patient alcohol rehabilitation program with a blood alcohol count of 0.108%, denied drinking prior to admission and denied having any alcohol-related problems.  He was discharged after 5 days for program non-compliance with a recommendation for Administrative Separation.  I do not believe there is a productive role for SA (Applicant) in the Navy and have therefore authorized his administrative separation."

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 891222 under honorable conditions (general) due to alcohol abuse - 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 states that his use of alcohol impaired his ability to serve.  The record shows the applicant was properly processed and separated for failing Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment.  Additionally, the applicant’s service was marred by one NJP.  The applicant’s service was not fully honorable.  The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief based on this issue is denied.

Issue 2 states that his ability to serve was impaired by his youth and immaturity.  The Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  While he may feel his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his action, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief is denied.

Issue 3 states that he has been a good citizen since discharge.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge.  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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB.  The Board did not find the post service documentation provided by the applicant significant enough to demonstrate that the discharge was inequitably assigned.  Relief is denied.

The applicant is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is recommended. 

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, effective 15 Jun 87 - 15 Aug 91), 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 D.C.  20374-5023