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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00707

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040324.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041103.  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: UNDER OTHER THAN 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.  “It is a injustice that I was separated under other than Honorable conditions because the record shows I had an adjustment disorder and was diagnosed as being an alcoholic.  I was willing to receive help, but no help was offered.  Less than 2 weeks later I was seperated under other than honorable conditions.  My total service was only 5 months and 2 days.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1)
Medical page dated October 2002
Client progress notes for July 13, 2002 to November 13, 2002
Pages 2 and 3 of the Commanding Officer’s recommendation

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	011205 - 020205	COG
	Active:   None			

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  020206		Date of Discharge:  030109

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  04  (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  34

Highest Rate:  AR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.00 (2)	Behavior:  1.00 (2)		OTA:  1.75

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  35

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

020814:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey lawful written order.
	Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  Restriction and extra duty for 15 days suspended.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020814:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence (3 specifications), and failure to obey other lawful written order), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

021025:	Medical evaluation:  Applicant diagnosed by competent medical authority as having adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood.  Applicant also diagnosed as alcohol dependent.  Applicant was considered competent to be discharged to his own custody and not a danger to self or others.  Applicant strongly denied he was an alcoholic, stated that he enjoys drinking and refused to stop.  Applicant further stated he was aware that alcohol likely contributed to his adjustment disorder but stated that he did not care.

021113:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
	Award: Forfeiture of $578 per month for 2 months, confinement on bread and water for 3 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

021113:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a least favorable characterization of under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

021113:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights.

021127:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

021127:	Commander, Carrier Group FIVE directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030109 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  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 (D and E).

Issue 1:  The Applicant argues that his diagnosed adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence sufficiently mitigated his misconduct to warrant an upgrade in his characterization of service.  The mere presence of an adjustment disorder or alcohol dependence is not a bar to Naval Service.  The Navy allows for various treatments of these conditions and grants waivers for affected members to continue their service.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge based merely on the fact that Applicant was permitted to continue his service despite the presence of a diagnosed adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence.  The medical diagnosis clearly states that the Applicant was fit for full duty and was not a harm to self or others.  Additionally, there is no evidence in the record to suggest that Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Therefore, the NDRB considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The Board found no indication in the record that the Applicant was inequitably or improperly denied treatment for his alcohol dependence.  The Applicant’s allegations, that he was denied assistance and counseling for his personal problems, do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case.  The record contains evidence that any offer of treatment to the Applicant for his alcohol dependence would have been futile.  During his medical diagnosis, the Applicant stated that he did not have an alcohol problem, that he enjoyed drinking and had no intentions of stopping.  The Applicant’s statements to this Board indicating he wanted alcohol rehabilitation treatment and would have accepted such treatment are disingenuous at best.  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.  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.  In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, for unauthorized absence for a period in excess of 30 days, if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial.

C.  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.  

D.  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.

E.  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