ex- MMFN, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20211014
Characterization of Service Received:   
Narrative Reason for Discharge:   ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE
Authority for Discharge:   MILPERSMAN 1910-152 [ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE] 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	
Narrative Reason change to: SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY
Reentry Code change to: NONE REQUESTED

Summary of Service

Prior Creditable Service:
Inactive:	 	             	Active:	 

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20090707	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20130409	Highest Rank/Rate:  MM3
Length of Service:  03  Year(s)  09  Month(s)  02  Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  82
Deployment/Operation: 

Evaluation Marks (# of occasions):  Performance/Proficiency: 3.2 (5)   Behavior/Conduct: 3.2 (5)   OTA: 3.17 
Fitness Reports: 

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Pistol  GCM NDSM GWOTSM 

Periods of UA:  NONE
Periods of CONF:  NONE
Other Time Lost per DD214:  NONE

SCM:    SPCM:    CIVIL ARREST:   CC:   NJP:  NONE Retention Warning Counseling:  NONE 

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):	20201103
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:	ND20-00670
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:		Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

	  “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)”
	
The NDRB will recommend to Commander, Navy Personnel Command or Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	
	Employment:		Finances:		Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Rehabilitation/Treatment:		Criminal Records:	
	Personal Documentation:		Community Service:		References:	
	Department of VA letter:		Other Documentation:	

Additional Statements

	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	
 
Types of Witnesses Who Testified

	Expert:  			Character:    

	Witness E-1:			Witness C-1:	
	Witness E-2:			Witness C-2:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560D), Change 29, 23 November 2009 until Present, Article 1910-152, SEPARATION BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE OR MULTIPLE DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) / DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED (DWIs).

B.  Secretary of the Navy Manual 5420.1 of 29 September 2020 (Standards for the execution of the Naval Discharge Review Board).

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  The Applicant contends that his post-service conduct and achievement are deserving of consideration for an upgrade. 
2.  The Applicant states that his discharge is inequitable as mitigating mental health issues were not accounted for in the
      assignment of his discharge characterization. 
3.  The Applicant states that is his discharge is improper as his administrative processing was not for a reason of misconduct.

Discussion

Date:  20220509		Location:  WASHINGTON D.C.	Representation:  

The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met.

As a result of the Applicant’s claim of a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, or Military Sexual Trauma, and in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1553, the NDRB included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist.  
Additionally, and pursuant to § 1553, the NDRB reviewed the case with liberal consideration that a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, or Military Sexual Trauma potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in the discharge of a lesser characterization.  A review of the record revealed that the Applicant did not deploy in support of a contingency operation, and so this case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with § 1553.

The Applicant's record of service included:

  for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): 
Article 92 (Failure to obey order, regulation) 

:  The Applicant contends that his post-service conduct and achievement are deserving of consideration for an upgrade. 

The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable.  The NDRB considers outstanding post-service conduct 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.  The Applicant provided a personal statement, evidence of continuous employment, and three character references.  However, post-service conduct does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct provides a basis for a more thorough understanding of the performance of the Applicant during the period of service that is the subject of the discharge review. In this case the NDRB did not grant relief based on this issue alone. 

Issue 2:  The Applicant states that his discharge is inequitable as mitigating mental health issues were not accounted for in the
assignment of his discharge characterization.  

The Applicant contends that his discharge is inequitable as mitigating mental health issues were not accounted for in the assignment of his discharge characterization. Through testimony and supporting documentation provided by the Applicant he accounts for mental health treatment pre and post-service. The Applicant contends that due to issues associated with the instability of his family and the verbal and physical abuse he endured in his youth there is a direct correlation with his cognitive development that contributed to his impulsive behavior and exercising poor judgment. Stating that these issues were never addressed while he was serving on active duty the Applicant seeks mitigation with the circumstances that led to his processing as an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. The Applicant believes that had his leadership had a better understanding of all issues associated with his pattern of behavior they could of demonstrated more leniency and understanding of how the circumstances evolved that led to his discharge. 

Based on a review of the Applicant’s service records and available evidence, the NDRB determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure.  MILPERSMAN 1910-152 states in relevant part “unless a written waiver is obtained, commands shall process for Administrative Separation all members considered to be treatment failures.”  Further, the characterization of separation should be General (Under Honorable Conditions) unless an Uncharacterized or Honorable is warranted.  In this case, the NDRB determined that there was no impropriety in the Command’s actions to process the Applicant as a rehabilitation failure given he violated his pre-scribed after-care plan within 24 hours of being released from a Level III Inpatient Treatment Program. His failure to abide by the directives placed upon him substantiate the command’s actions. 

The Applicant’s claim that his discharge characterization is inequitable because of there was no documentation of misconduct and underlying mental health issues were not accounted for at the time of discharge. In addition, a lack of documentation citing misconduct would create an unfair situation for the Applicant to petition for an upgrade. While the Applicant may deem this as inequitable and unfair the Government enjoys the presumption of regularity and it is up to the Applicant to prove or disprove the cited circumstances.  In this case, the NDRB found several factors that constitute the assignment of a General vice an Honorable characterization. In review of the record the NDRB identified the fact that the Applicant was not forthcoming during the enlistment and nuclear power screening process. Specifically, he intentionally did not disclose pre-service medical treatment for Attention Deficit Disorder and prescribed Adderall. In addition, he intentionally denied pre-service alcohol abuse and marijuana use for his personal advancement for screening purposes.  While in-service he continued to abuse alcohol while underage and was associated with acts of misconduct to which other Sailors were directly held accountable. During testimony, and within his application, the Applicant did not recognize his willful participation in behavior that is prejudicial to good order and discipline because he states he was not directly disciplined for this misconduct. The Applicant was however directly disciplined at an NJP for a UCMJ violation prior to his discharge which is documented by the identification of a reduction in rank in his performance evaluations. The Applicant also admitted to this NJP and the disciplinary action taken by his Commander. Thus the NDRB determined that negative aspects of the Applicant’s service do exist that justify the equity of the assignment of a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge in accordance with MILPERSMAN 1910-152. 

In regard to the Applicant’s claim that his mental health issues were not accounted for the NDRB was challenged to accept this petition given the fact he went through in-patient Level III alcohol treatment. The comprehensive treatment within this program, aside from the assignment itself, speaks to the command’s awareness to account for issues and conditions that contributed to the administrative separation of the Applicant. The Applicant himself also had responsibility to provide timely and accurate information for is command to consider, but he elected not to by withholding pre-service issues during the screening process and during treatment if he felt they were unaccounted for. The NDRB did not identify any evidence that his command was not compassionate or ignorant toward his disposition. Relief for this issue is denied. 

Issue 3:  The Applicant states that is his discharge is improper as his administrative processing was not for a reason of misconduct.

The Applicant contends that his discharge characterization is unjust as it was not for a reason of misconduct. He states the assigned narrative for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure (ARF) supports this petition as it represents issues beyond his control and that his in-service performance and conduct is deserving of an upgrade to Honorable. As previously stated the Applicant was appropriately processed as an ARF per the MILPERSMAN as he failed to comply with aftercare standards. Discharge characterization is determined by the existence and severity of misconduct. In this case the Applicant was disciplined at a NJP and reduced in rank. Thus while his violation for NJP may not of been why he was being processed for separation his complete record is accounted for in the assignment of the characterization. In this matter the NDRB agreed with the Commanders application of all factors included with determining the discharge characterization and found the assignment of a General (Under Honorable Conditions) to be proper and equitable. Relief is denied. 

The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis.  If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order.  Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.  In this case, the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.  In making its determination, the Board accounted for the factors that led to the Applicant’s administrative processing and the presence of misconduct adjudicated at NJP that led to his reduction in rank. 

The Board considered the Applicant’s overall capacity to serve; his entire military performance and conduct; his mental health diagnosis; the nexus between his alcohol abuse and his mental/emotional stability; and the severity of his conduct in relation to his discharge characterization.  Consequently, the Board found a change in characterization of service was not appropriate. 

MEDICAL OPINION

1.	Does the available record reasonably support PTSD (or other boarded mental health condition) existed at the time of applicant’s military service?	No	
2.	A.	Were these conditions present at time of misconduct?	NA	
	B.	Were these conditions mitigating for the misconduct?	NA	
3.	Were all required mental health and/or medical evaluations conducted in accordance with regulations, prior to the administrative separation of the applicant?	Unknown	
4.	Medical board member comments:	General discharge for alcohol treatment failure.  Completed level III treatment at SARP 13 December 2012 for alcohol dependence.  Had alcohol night of discharge from SARP.  Had alcohol related incident shortly thereafter- was passenger in car stopped for drinking related offense, was found to have been drinking.  Applicant does not contest the facts of the case, contends that he was not in control of his drinking because he was abused as a child and has traits of a personality disorder and should therefore be granted an upgrade.  During military Service diagnosed with alcohol dependence, no PTSD, no personality disorder.  Applicant had misconduct after SARP failure which is apparently the reason for general versus honorable discharge. Last mental health treatment was 2 years ago. No nexus between mental health and misconduct was found. Applicant was an alcohol treatment failure with subsequent misconduct; the applicant’s claims of childhood abuse and personality disorder as reasons for his drinking are not compelling.  Medical officer opinion is that there are no grounds for an upgrade.	

The NDRB recognizes that serving in the all-volunteer Armed Forces is challenging but reflects a commitment to our Nation; thus, service members deserve to be recognized upon completion of their service.  One of the ways in which our service members are recognized is through the determination of their characterization of service.  Most servicemembers, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges.  In fairness to those Marines and Sailors who served honorably, Commanders and Separation Authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving servicemembers receive no higher characterization than is due.  The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances.

Decision

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the Board found .  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS), the narrative reason for separation shall  ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE with a corresponding separation code of JPD, and the reentry code shall  RE-4.  The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB.  The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149.  

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Additional NDRB Reviews: After receiving a NDRB Document Review, an Applicant remains eligible for a Personal Appearance/Telephonic Hearing if the application is received by the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claim(s) related to their discharge as well as evidence of post-service accomplishments.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing by an Attorney (or Advocate) is recommended but not required.  There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.  However, if you have been discharged for more than 15 years, already had a personal appearance hearing, or otherwise exhausted your opportunity to be heard by the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx for further review.

Appeal Procedures on NDRB Decision: If you contest the NDRB’s decision in your case AND you already contested the NDRB’s previous decision at a Personal Appearance Hearing or otherwise exhausted your opportunity before the NDRB (or it has been more than 15 years since your discharge), the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx for further review.  The BCNR is the highest level of administrative review within the Department of the Navy/Marine Corps to correct errors or injustices to member’s records.

Complaint Procedures on Format: If you believe the decision in your case is ambiguous, 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 (JSRA), OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the DoD Instruction 1332.28 before submitting such a complaint.  This complaint procedure does not permit a challenge on the merits of the NDRB’s decision; the JSRA is designed solely to ensure that the NDRB decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness.  Therefore, if you are contesting the merits of the NDRB’s decision and already had a NDRB personal appearance hearing or otherwise exhausted your opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may appeal/petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx for further review.

Service [VA] Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of facilitating access to VA benefits.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety, equity, and clemency of a discharge.  Consequently, the Applicant should petition the VA, which determines eligibility for post-service benefits.  The VA conducts its own determination of eligibility based on service records and input from an Applicant upon their request.  Therefore, if the NDRB grants a change to a discharge, the NDRB will notify the Commander, Navy Personnel Command or Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate; however, it is the Applicant’s responsibility to ensure these changes are incorporated into the record by the respective Service Headquarters.  Further, it is the Applicant’s sole responsibility to submit these changes to the VA for a determination of eligibility for VA Benefits.  Finally, the Applicant should refer to the Veterans Administration website (https://www.va.gov/) for information regarding VA benefits and healthcare.  Additionally, to find the nearest VA office to receive assistance with determining VA eligibility/access, the Applicant should refer to https://www.va.gov/find-locations.

Employment/Educational Opportunities: The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: The NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code.  Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades: There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and/or Traumatic Brain Injury: For all claims involving PTSD and/or TBI, the NDRB’s review implemented the guidance set forth in the SECDEF Memorandum of 3 September 2014 (Supplemental guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).  In accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1) & (d)(2), the NDRB included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution and a final decision.  If the Applicant’s claim of PTSD/TBI was based in whole or in part on sexual trauma, intimate partner violence, or spousal abuse, the NDRB obtained a review by a psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker with training on mental health issues associated with PTSD/TBI or other trauma.  

Post-Service Conduct: The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate that in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 special 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.  The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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.

Military Sexual Trauma: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) uses the term "military sexual trauma" (MST) to refer to experiences of sexual assault or repeated, threatening sexual harassment experienced while on federal active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty training.  To get confidential one-on-one help please contact the MST Coordinator at your nearest VA Medical Center or Call Safe Helpline at 1-877-995-5247 or visit www.mentalhealth.va.gov/msthome.asp.

Reporting Military Sexual Trauma: To report a military sexual trauma, you can make an anonymous report to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) by Text or Online.  The NCIS Tip Line provides service members, veterans and civilians a safe, discreet and ANONYMOUS option to report criminal and force protection threats within the USN and USMC without concerns of retaliation.  To report a crime by Text: Text 274637 (CRIMES); Type “NCIS” at the top of the message; and include as much detail as possible to ensure your tip can effectively be investigated.  To send your ANONYMOUS Tip via the online, go to https://www.tipsubmit.com/webtipsNAV.aspx?AgencyID=840.

Suicide Prevention: Veterans in emotional crisis or their loved ones can call the free and confidential Veterans Crisis Line at 1-800-273-8255 (then press 1); or chat online at http://www.veteranscrisisline.net, or send a text message to 838255 to connect with a caring, qualified Veteran Affairs Responder who can deal with any immediate crisis.