ex-OS2, USN
ND07-00924

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20070626 	Characterization Received:  
Narrative Reason:  ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE 	Authority:  MILPERSMAN 1910-152

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:  
			Narrative Reason change to: 
Applicant’s Issues:	1. Period of service on DD Form 214 incorrect

Decision

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE.

Date:  20080103		Location:  Washington D.C	 Representation:  

Discussion

Issue 1 ().  The Applicant contends that he was honorably discharged from the naval service on 20011119 and immediately re-enlisted on 20011120.  He provides copies of purported discharge and reenlistment certificates dated the same, respectively.  The Applicant’s service record contained only his initial enlistment contract on 19980409 for a period of 4 years with an extension of 12 months.  It did not contain a reenlistment contract or an indication of reenlistment in his history of assignments.   The Separation Authority did, however, note that the Applicant’s end of obligated active service was 20071119, and end date consistent with a reenlistment on 20011120.  The Board concluded that, in light of all the evidence including that supplied by the Applicant, that the period of service under review ran from 20011120 until discharge on 20030613.  For the Applicant’s initial period of service, the NDRB will recommend an administrative change to his DD Form 214.  For the period of service under review, the Board determined that the Applicant’s service was marred by a nonjudicial punishment for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Articles 111 and 134, and an apparent civilian alcohol related driving incident in which his blood alcohol count exceeded the legal limit.  Violation of Article 111 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized upon conviction at special or general court-martial.  Per regulation, the Applicant should also have been processed for administrative separation for the reason of misconduct.  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 and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that 

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

  “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19980409 - 20011119”
	
The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. 

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19980402 - 19980408  		Active: 	19980409 - 20011119  
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20011120		Years Contracted:  UNABLE TO DETERMINE	Date of Discharge:  20030613
Length of Service:  01  Yrs  06  Mths  23  Dys		Lost Time:  Days UA:    Days Confined:  
Education Level:  		Age at Enlistment:  		AFQT:  62	Highest Rank/Rate:  OS2
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):	Performance:  3.0(2)	Behavior:  3.0(2)	 	OTA:  3.29 
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  NMCAM, BATTLE “E”, GCM, NDSM, SSDR

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

20011213:	NJP -- Viol UCMJ Arts. 111 and 134.  No further information in record.
	[Extracted from Commander, Mine Assembly Group letter of 20030530.]

20020107:	Medical Record:  Reason for visit:  Alcohol screening
	Diagnosis:  Positive ETOH abuse and dependence
	Recommendation:  IMPACT course

20020116:	Completed 20 day IMPACT course.

20030412:	Alcohol related incident.  
	[Extracted from Commander, Mine Assembly Group letter of 20030530.]

20030522:	Medical Record:  Reason for visit:  Preliminary screening evaluation.
	Diagnosis:  Appears to be indication of alcohol abuse.
	Recommendation:  Outpatient Level I treatment.  Motivation appears good.

Discharge Process

Date Notified:					20030522
Reason for Discharge:	
Least Favorable Characterization:	

20030530:	Applicant declined Level I Outpatient Treatment for alcohol abuse.

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:		20030530
Rights Elected at Notification:
	Consult with Counsel			
	Obtain Copies of Documents		
	Submit Statement(s) (date)			 
	Administrative Board			
	GCMCA review				

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):	 
Separation Authority (date):	COMMANDER, MOBILE MINE ASSEMBLY GROUP (20030530)
              Reason for discharge directed:	 - 
              Characterization directed:	
Date Applicant Discharged:	20030613

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Related to Military Service:	Service and/or Medical Record:  		Other Records:  

Related to Post-Service Period:  	
	Employment:  			Finances:  			Education: 		
	Health/Medical Records:  		Substance Abuse:			Criminal Records:  	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:  		References:  		
	
Additional Statements From Applicant:  	From Representative:    		Other Documentation (Describe)  

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 January 2004, Article 1910-152 (formerly Article 3630550), SEPARATION BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION.

B.  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 V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity.

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 111, Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil.”

Additional Reviews:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the 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.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  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 of the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

Reenlistment/RE-code:  Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct:  DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record.  Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD.”  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades - 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 may 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.  

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  

Board Membership:  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