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

 ex-AN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00697

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020418, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretary Authority.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030116.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the 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:  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3630550.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

Awards and Commendations

 - National Defense Service Medal
 - Sea Service Development Ribbon
 - Southwest Asia Service medal
 - Joint Meritorious Unit Awards
 - Four Letters of Commendation
 - A Letter of appreciation

     I joined the NAVY because I was interested in a carrier in aviation.  Right after I came out of boot camp I was station at Washington State.  The command that I was assigned to was sent on a cruise to the Mediterranean Sea.  When my command arrived at the Aircraft carrier, I was sent TAD immediately, to work for the mess deck (food service division).  While I was on this cruise I was so proud an enthusiastic about being in the NAVY that I did everything that I was a asked to do to the best of my ability, that I receive a letter of commendation from the Commanding Officer of the U.S. Forestall for professional achievement.  The cruise lasted 7 months, in which I was supposed to spend 90 days TAD, after the 90 days passed I talk to my Chief Petty Officer to see when I was going to be recall back to my squadron and go worth with the Aviation mechanics, that's when my CPO told me that I had to stay because they didn't had a replacement for me.  I ended spending 7 months the entire cruise TAD.  After the cruise I talked to my CPO again about my situation, he said that for the time I spend TAD that I wasn't going back again.  When my squadron arrived at the Naval Air Station at Whidbey Island, I was sent to work in the Aviation Mechanics shop.  Two months went by and I was called to my CPO office and was notified that I had to go TAD again.

     I reminded him of what he had told me that I didn't have to go TAD no more, that's when he said that I didn't had no choice and that I had to go.  At this time, I was so disappointed that I tried a few time to transfer from the west coast to the east coast and was told to forget about it, that the transfer would never happen.  At one time while working at TAD, I was injured and was put on light duty.  While on light duty I got into alcohol related trouble, but I never got in any kind of trouble with the law, I was then sent to alcohol rehab.  While on rehab I participated with the class assignments, at one time the class was giving an assignment to do at home, I did the assignment but my roommate who was going back on a cruise was packing and by mistake packed my notebook in his bag.  The next morning when I had to go back to the class I couldn't find my notebook, I went and told the class instructor of what had happen but he didn't believe me and said that I was lying, that I never did the assignment.  He then failed me from the class and recommend that I be discharged for alcohol rehab failure.  When I went back to my squadron, my commander told me that I was being discharge with a General discharge under honorable condition.  I was told that it was as good as an honorable the only different was that would loose the GI bill.  Now with all the bad experiences that I went through in the NAVY I believed that I have been treaded unfair, and I wanted to get out and didn't care what happened anymore, so I decided to accept the general discharge not knowing of how it was going to affect my life after the NAVY.  Since I was discharged, I haven't been in any kind of trouble with the law or otherwise.  Before I was discharge I was supposed to be sent to the classes that prepare an enlisted personal how to deal with the civilian world, I was never sent to any of those classes (DORS).

     I recently took the test to become a police officer because I wanted to join my two brothers in the Police Force.

     At this time, I like to take the time and the opportunity to thank the United States Navy for considering my application for an upgrade discharge.

Signed by the Applicant

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	900606 - 901003	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  901004		Date of Discharge:  940322

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  05  19
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  31

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.36 (5)	Behavior:  3.32 (5)		OTA:  3.52

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, SWASM, JMUA

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3630550.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

901010:	Acknowledged the Navy policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

901011:	Emergency Room, Naval Hospital, Oak Harbor, WA:  Here for fit for duty - arrived late to muster, now smells of possible alcohol.  Has been drinking 2 glasses of beer every hour since 0330 hrs.  Reported to muster at 0800 hrs.  Denies any drug use.  Lab drawn for medical and legal.  Urine drug screen and blood alcohol test sent to lab.  Disposition:  Quarters - not competent for duty.  Time of Release:  1100, condition unchanged upon release.

910911:	USS FORRESTAL (CV 59) Sickbay:  25 year old male brought to Emergency Room by duty HM & Security due to receiving call from berthing by friend stating Applicant was intoxicated on duty and not breathing well.  Pt walked with assistance to ER.  No chief complaints.  Pt had not left ship this P.M. had gotten alcohol onboard ship.  Pt was observed for a period of 8 hours and had no problems.  Command contacted, he was released to VAQ 133 personnel, stable condition. Assessment: Alcohol intoxication.
	Plan:  1 - Admitted to Ward 1, 2 - CAAC referral submitted.

911008:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (alcohol abuse as a result of incident on 11 Sep 1991, first incident), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

931201:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Failure to go to appointed placed of duty at the time prescribed; violation of UCMJ Article 134: (unknown).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 months (suspended for 6 months), extra duty for 8 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for 6 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

931230:	Naval Hospital, Oak Harbor, WA, Alcohol Medical Eval:  Referred due to late for muster, and drinking on board ship.  Started drinking at age 18, frequently - 1 to 2 times per week, amount - 6-8 beers.  Continues use despite knowledge of problem.  Member meets the DSM-III-R criteria for Psycho-active substance abuse.  Recommend Level II.

940131:	Commander, Naval Base Seattle advised CO, Attack Squadron 196: Applicant was dropped from Level II Treatment Program for alcohol abuse due do his unwillingness to provide a daily journal and turn it in on time.  Applicant's incomplete or late journal was addressed on two previous occasions resulting in warnings.  His potential for continued useful Navy Service appears poor and his prognosis for further alcohol abuse is high.  Recommend he be handled administratively as a rehabilitation failure.  

940201:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.

940201:	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 and the right to submit statement.  Applicant did not object to the separation.

940209:	Commanding Officer, Attack Squadron 196, advised CNMPC of Applicant's discharge with general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 940322 with a characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) 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 contends that he worked very hard and was treated unfairly by the U.S. Navy.  The Board disagrees with the Applicant's first issue.  When the service of a member of U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) 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 Applicant’s service was marred by frequent alcohol related incidents.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant believes he was treated unfairly by the U.S. Navy.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that most members of the Navy serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  The NDRB failed to find any instance when the Applicant was treated unfairly.  The Applicant's service was equitably characterized as being performed under general conditions.

Issue 2:  The Applicant stated he had problems with alcohol resulting in minor disciplinary problems.  The Board found the Applicant was of sound mind when he committed his misconduct.  While he may feel that his alcoholism was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the Applicant was not an alcohol rehabilitation failure or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief on this basis is denied.

Issue 3:  The Applicant desires to have benefits offered by the Veterans Administration (VA), which he would be entitled to with an honorable discharge.  The 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.

The following is provided for the benefit of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, the discharge or characterization of the Applicant's service had to be improper or inequitable.  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.  Relief denied.

The Applicant is reminded that the period of eligibility for a personal appearance hearing is 15 years from the date of discharge.  The application package must be submitted to the NDRB prior to the expiration of the 15 year period.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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 "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 Room 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023