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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-AD2, USN
Docket No. ND05-01364

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050818.  The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 20060614.  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 and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I have been discharged for 8 years now, and I am hoping to get a job with Civil Service.  I feel the discharge is inequitable because in 10 years of service I never received NJP.  I received my DUI at a time when the military was promoting zero tolerance on everything including alcohol.  This was a very difficult time in my life and I had gotten into some trouble, I don’t feel the command was concerned, and feel if I was still in my prior command I would have been helped, instead of processed out.  At the time, I was with a physically abusive husband and had many issues with no where to go for help.  Up until this time I was a model sailor.  I always performed to the best of my ability and my evaluation for the first 8 years of service should more than prove the kind of person I was.  I always strived to get every qualification and took pride in my job at all times.  Even when I was in trouble and due to be processed out of the military, my command allowed me to keep my CDI stamp until a few days before my discharge.  I was told this was an absolute no no , but they knew that even in my situation I still had complete integrity and would not knowingly accept any work that was not of the best quality.  This I found very ironic, because upon receiving my discharge evaluation they made me look as though I were a person with no integrity or moral value and was even stripped of my Air Warfare Wings (a accomplishment I worked very hard at and was very proud of).  That time has passed now, and in the past 8 years I have been employed, lead a good life, and had no alcohol related incidents.  For the past 3 years I have been working as an aircraft mechanic for a contractor.  I am now, however, trying to advance my career.  Working for Civil Service would be a great step in this direction.  I would be very grateful to have this request approved and I thank the board for any time it puts towards my cause.”

Documentation

Only the service and medical records were reviewed.  The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19870331 - 19870621	COG
	Active:   USN	19870622 - 19910502	HON
	Active:	USN	19910503 - 19950606	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19950607		Date of Discharge:  19970404

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01 09 28
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  26

Years Contracted:  2

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  78

Highest Rate:  AD2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.0 (2)			Behavior:  3.0 (2)		OTA:  3.22

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Meritorious Unit Commendation, National Defense Service Medal, Navy “E” Ribbon, Second Good Conduct Medal for period ending 95JUN12

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: 

950607:	Reenlisted this date for a term of 2 years.

960315:	Applicant failed to maintain qualification as an Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist (EAWS) and is no longer authorized to wear the EAWS insignia or use the (AW) designator as part of the rating.

Undated:	Civil Conviction:  Superior Court of Island County, Washington for violation of DUI on 960905.
Sentence:  Unknown.  [Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record, Block 43.]

961205:	NH-OH Mental Health:  Applicant meets DSM IV criteria for alcohol dependence.  Refer to Level III.  Applicant advised to enter precare 2 x weekly @ CAAC.
	Diagnosis: (1) Alcohol dependence, not in remission.
	(2) Post traumatic stress disorder.
(3) Depression.
Recommendation:  Applicant is fit for fully duty and responsible for actions.  Applicant is not suicidal or homicidal at this time.  Caution not to drink alcohol during this time of stress.  Please bring this report to the attention of the Commanding Officer.  Applicant referred to Level III treatment if command concurs.
History of Present Illness:
27 yo female married/separated with 2 children who live with estranged husband present for evaluation of alcohol dependence.  Applicant was recently arrested on the Seaplane base for drunk and disorderly or like charges.  Had a DWI in 96.  Applicant states she attended Level III in 1992 but did not participate in aftercare.
Past History:
Level III treatment June 1993 – Corpus Christi TX – did not participate in aftercare.  Marital counseling.

970226:	Applicant enrolled in Alcohol Rehabilitation treatment.

970315:	Applicant assigned mark of 1.0 in block 36, Military bearing/character.  [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/613]

970315:	Applicant recommendation for advancement to AD1 and retention withdrawn this date due to substandard performance.  [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/613]

970328:	Applicant successfully completed alcohol treatment.  Diagnosis at time of transition:  Alcohol dependence in remission.

970404:	Evaluation Report and Counseling Record, Block 43. Comments on Performance:
	* 36 Continued alcohol related incidents after completing level 3 alcohol rehabilitation deemed her unsuitable for continued naval service.  Misconduct committed on 96Sep05 resulted in conviction by Superior Court of Island County, Washington under DUI.  Misconduct committed on 97Jan22 resulted in military arrest under Article 92.  Member being processed for ADSEP upon completion of 2nd Level 3 alcohol rehabilitation. Excellent engine mechanic. If not for off duty alcohol incidents, Petty Officer S_(Applicant) is quite capable of continued naval service.

970404:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3650550.

*Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.  

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970404 by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions).  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 (B and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

The NDRB advises the applicant that her service record is missing the administrative discharge package. In the Applicant’s case, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and that the Applicant’s discharge was regular in all respects.

The Applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because in 10 years of service she never received NJP. The NDRB advises the Applicant that when the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A general discharge 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 misconduct committed on 19960905, which resulted in conviction, by Superior Court of Island County, Washington under DUI and misconduct committed on 19970122 that resulted in a military arrest under Article 92. The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violations of Article 92 and 111 are considered serious offenses and typically warrant a punitive discharge if adjudged at a special or general court-martial. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings; however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. The record of evidence shows that the member had an alcohol related incident after completion of level III treatment. Per NAVPERS 15560C, a sailor who has completed Level II or III treatment any time in his or her career, and has subsequently had in his or her current enlistment an alcohol or drug-related incident; may be separated by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. The Board found that the evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for her conduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions.  The record also shows that the Navy provided the Applicant with proper counseling and treatment (level III x 2 and an aftercare program) for her alcohol dependence. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of her characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends that family problems (physically abusive husband) contributed to her misconduct and that she had nowhere to go for help. The Applicant also implies that these problems should be taken into account in assessing an upgrade to her discharge.  Personal problems that a sailor faces while on active duty do not mitigate any misconduct undertaken by that service member.  There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant did violate the UCMJ and that she was accountable for her actions. 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 found that The Applicant’s service was equitably characterized.  Relief denied.

The Applicant states “I have been discharged for 8 years now, and I am hoping to get a job with Civil Service”. The NDRB advises the Applicant that the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. Relief denied.

 The Applicant states, “time has passed now and in the past 8 years I have been employed, lead a good life, and had no alcohol related incidents”. The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  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 Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

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 additional evidence related to this discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630550, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

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