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

ex-AA, USN 
Docket No. ND03-01283

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030724.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests 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 20040728.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I entered the US Navy on 7 March 2001 and n 19 Jan 2002 I completed the Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist Course while assigned to the USS John C Stennis (CVN 74).  During my time in the Navy I felt that alcohol has having ill effects on me and I sought on my own to get help for this problem.  I knew something was wrong and I knew I needed help in resolving this problem.  My latest evaluation report shows that although I was considered an average sailor, I also showed potential to be an outstanding one which is what I was trying to do.  In the process of self admitting my problem and seeking help, I ended up receiving a General Discharge with no hopes of ever going back in the US military.  I feel that the circumstances that took place in my case were unfair and that I was not afforded the appropriate opportunities to resolve my personal issue.  I am requesting an upgrade in my separation to an Honorable Discharge so that I can continue to improve myself by attending school and moving on with my life.  Please let me know if anything further is needed from me on this case.  Thank you.

I would also like to point out that although the Clinical Psychologist I saw, Dr Hall, recommended that I start on medication for my personal problem, I in fact was denied this medication on board the the USS Stennis.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
SF600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) by a licensed Clinical Psychologist dtd Sep 26, 2002
Evaluation Report dated 21 Jan 03
Certificate of Completion of qualification (Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist) dtd Jan 19, 2002
Newspaper article in Applicant’s local paper
Real Estate Sales Associate License (State of Florida), dtd Nov 24, 2003
Lee County, Southwest Florida, Veterans Service Office, letter dtd Feb 2, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	010213 - 010306	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010307		Date of Discharge:  030221

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  11  15
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  43/52

Highest Rate:  AA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.0 (1)	Behavior:  1.0 (1)		OTA:  2.33

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NUC, NDSM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD AND APPLICANT UNABLE TO PROVIDE THE REQUESTED DOCUMENTION.

020725:	Senior Counselor CAAC:  19 year old male was self-referred due to receiving a DUI on July 4, 2002 BAC .09.  Pt was evaluated as alcohol dependent by meeting the following DSM IV criteria:  (1) Tolerance:  Pt stated that he begins to feel minimally buzzed at five beers (12oz cans) and can drink up to 12 beers before intoxication.  Also demonstrated by pt stating, “When I was 17 years old, I would drink 6-7 beers to feel drunk, now I have to drink 10-12 for the same effects”.  (2) Loss of control:  Pt states, “Recently the amount I drink has increased, I drink more than I intend all the time”.  Pt is spending more money then he has on alcohol, and is exceeding limits he sets for himself.  Pt cannot stop drinking until intoxicated.  (3) Unsuccessful efforts to control use:  Pt thinks he should cut down but hasn’t and tried to go on the wagon but only lasted 4 months.  (4) Excessive time involvement:  Pt stated, “I will look for a place that serves alcohol when I eat out”.  Pt has self-talk about this drinking.  (5) Life style changes due to use:  Pt states, “I have been avoiding talking to my Lawyer about my DUI because I go drinking instead”.  
Recommend Intensive Out Patient Treatment with medical services.

020813:	LIP diagnosis – 303.90 – Alcohol Dependence
Recommend Intensive Out Patient with dorm – consider residential, if necessary, as pt reports still drinking despite host of problems & consequences already in his face, i.e., pt is risk to drink surreptitiously while in treatment.

020909:	Commenced Intensive Outpatient Treatment Program and completed program on 021004.  

020926:	Licensed Clinical Psychologist:  19 year old single white Male, E-3 with 1 year and 7 months continuous active duty currently stationed onboard the USS Stennis was seen by this provider for an evaluation of possible Adult ADHD at the request of the patient.  Pt is currently in his third week in the IOP program with a diagnosis of Alcohol Dependence.  He reported being diagnosed with ADHD at age of 11 and was placed on Ritalin for approximately 6 months.  He discontinued the medication because he did not feel it was helping.  He described a childhood history consistent with ADHD including frequent behavior problems, short attention span, restlessness and school problems.  Presently, he reports continuing difficulties with attention span, restlessness and impulsive spending.  He completed an Adult ADD Symptom Checklist.  Discussed typical patterns of ADHD in adulthood, general education ab out the diagnosis and treatment options such as medication and/or behavioral techniques.
	Pt arrived 15 minutes late, reporting that he forgot about the appointment until someone mentioned something about ADHD in class.
	Assessment:  Pt continues to show symptoms of ADHD and is very motivated to receive assistance with this.  He struggles in particular with management of money, gambling and feelings of boredom.  He apparently has overcome many of his symptoms though including behavior problems, problems with authority figures and other relational problems.  Medication management is the treatment of choice, however if this is not possible, he will need to be aware of his deficits and employ behavioral techniques to manage these symptoms.
	Plan:  Pt will be followed-up next week for feedback regarding the assessment and assistance with some behavioral strategies to work around his ADHD symptoms.  Follow-up appointment scheduled for Wed, Oct 2, at 1100.  Continue with ITP.

021008:	CO’s NJP held this date.  [EXTRACTED FROM PAGE 4 (NAVPERS 1070/604) – AWARDS.]

030204:	CO’s NJP held this date.  [EXTRACTED FROM PAGE 4 (NAVPERS 1070/604) – AWARDS.]

030221:	Evaluation Report for period from 02JUL16 to 03FEB21 made the following statement:  “AA W_ (Applicant) is a below average worker, he never realized his full potential in the workcenter due to his constant tardiness.  Due to his inability to meet the minimal standards for continued Naval Service, and alcohol rehabilitation failure, AA W_ (Applicant) is processed for separation.

030221:	Applicant discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030221 under general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1:  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. A characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Sailor.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions thus substantiating the misconduct.  The Board found no indication in the record that the Applicant was inequitably or improperly denied treatment or access to prescribed medications.  The Applicant’s commission of a serious offense in addition to his alcohol rehabilitation failure led to processing for administrative separation.  The Applicant’s summary of service, clearly reflects the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB).  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veteran’s benefits and this issue does not serve to provide foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  

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 a positive employment record, an alcohol-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.  At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an 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 other evidence related to his discharge 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until Present, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023