Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600006
Original file (ND0600006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-MM3, USN
Docket No. ND06-00006

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050928. 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 20060619. 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) by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter:

 “My discharge was inequitable because it was not brought to the Separation Authority, as it was my right. My written statement and all attached documents put together while I was attached to the USS Henry M. Jackson (SSBN 730) fighting for my retention in the Naval Service were not even reviewed, instead I was separated directly from TPU, Puget Sound, WA as they said they had the discharge authority, regardless of the fact I had a package waiting for review by the Separation Authority. Had this process been handled differently it is my understanding that today I might still be in Navy blue and would have fulfilled my entire enlistment and been given an Honorable discharge. To this day I have never heard from the Separation Authority.

My discharge is inequitable because it was based on two isolated alcohol related incidents that occurred during a very difficult time in my life. The Navy geographically separated me from my wife when they stationed me in Bangor, WA and my wife in Norfolk, VA. This stress added to my already stressful life as a submariner and release led me to drink alcohol in excessive amounts. My life-threatening problem of alcohol was brought on by the strain of the Navy. My service when onboard the boat, out to sea and away from alcohol was nothing but honorable. I proudly served our country, yet feel this service is forever tainted by my General discharge due to two isolated alcohol incidents.

My discharge is improper because my condition, Alcoholism, is a medical disorder. Alcoholism is a disease. It has nothing to do with misconduct. Across the globe Alcoholism is recognized as a disease, therefore is it justified for a disease to mar my discharge type?

I appreciate the time and consideration of the Review Board. Hopefully this is not a waste of our time.

Sincerely,
[signed]
 M_ L. G_(Applicant)”

 Submitted by Applicant subsequent to submission of application:

 “ Dear NDRB personnel,

I am writing this supplemental letter to better inform the board to make a decision. In the past months I have begun a new lifestyle and am picking up the pieces from one bad year. I am enrolled and plan on beginning college at the University of Kentucky in January of ‘06. I plan on pursuing a Mechanical Engineering degree to enhance what the Navy has already taught me. With a General discharge I am not eligible to receive the Montgomery GI bill college assistance money. This would help greatly to assist my financial struggles through college.

I am well aware of the fact that I made several mistakes, most obviously getting behind the wheel of an automobile while intoxicated. There are no do-overs in life, however I have come to terms with the fact that I must move on and learn from past mistakes. My last 1-2 years in the Navy were difficult ones. I was a geo-bachelor separated from my wife by 3000 miles. I dealt with my loneliness by drinking alcohol. Upon my return from my third strategic deterrent patrol I left for a weekend visit to see my wife and found her living with another man. Needless to say my drinking spiraled out of control and I never came out of my own alcohol induced haze until a stint in county jail. At that point my Naval career was over, I was on probation and job opportunities were looking grim. I went through some difficult times, but I’m still here and glad of it.

Getting a discharge upgrade is very important to me. Partially for the college money and partially for getting rid of the General-Under Honorable Conditions label. I made my fair share of mistakes, and Lord knows I have some more still to make. One thing I say is that I am a good, honest and loyal man. Any man who I served with will tell you the same. I’m sure in five years time I will be able to send a college diploma, a letter from my employer, and who knows who else saying I am a good man who works hard and they enjoy being around. Then I might have a stronger case for a discharge upgrade, however right now I feel it is very important as I can really use the assistance putting myself through college.

I sincerely hope the board looks at my case, can relate to my crazy year or so in the Navy and help me out. I believe my service in the Navy was honorable, had it not been for my DUI’s I would still be in my Navy blue, and I know I regret that very much. I loved the Navy, however dealing with the betrayal from my wife was something I just had a lot of trouble dealing with.
Thanks for your time and consideration,

 M_ L. G_(Applicant) ”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s letter to “Separation Authority”, dtd January 21, 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20020110 - 20020115      COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20020116             Date of Discharge: 20050218

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 01 03
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

 Age at Entry: 19

 Years Contracted: 4 (24 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 89

 Highest Rate: MM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA*                                    Behavior: NA*             OTA: NA*

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): National Defense Service Medal; Global War on Terrorism Service Medal; Enlisted Submarine Warfare Specialist Breast Insignia
* Not Available


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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-152 (formerly Article 3630550).
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

020424:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs):
         Specification 1: On or about 24Mar02 violate a gen reg, to wit: SECNAVINST 1700.11C, dtd 21Jul86 by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under the lawful age of 21 years.
         Specification 2: RTCINST1616.4H dtd 20Dec99, by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages.
         Award: Forfeiture of $304.00 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

020424:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (OIC’s mast on 24 Apr 02, VUMCJ, Art 92, failure to obey a lawful general regulation, drinking under the legal age, and failure to obey a lawful written order, drinking while in a recruit status.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

 040402:  Applicant arrested for DUI. Adjudication deferred until October 2004.

040405:  Applicant received XOI for Article 86 – Unauthorized absence. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 050128.]

 041019:  Applicant to intensive outpatient treatment in the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program, Naval Station Bremerton,WA.

 041112:  Applicant successfully completed intensive outpatient treatment. Diagnosis: (1) Alcohol dependence, (2) Nicotine Dependence. Transitioned to Continuing Care.
041204:  Applicant found unfit for duty. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 050128.]

041204:  Applicant arrested for DUI. Adjudication still pending from the civilian courts. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 050128.]

 050119:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

050125:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation and to submit a statement.
050128:  Commanding Officer, USS HENRY M. JACKSON (SSBN 730) recommended administrative separation by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. Commanding Officer’s comments: “MM3(SS) G_(Applicant) has repeatedly demonstrated a life threatening problem with alcohol. While at my command he has been arrested twice for driving under the influence (DUI). After successfully completing the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program – Intensive Outpatient at Naval Hospital Bremerton in November 2004, he subsequently reported for duty on 4 December 2004 and was found unfit. Based on this alcohol rehabilitation failure I initiated administrative separation proceedings on 6 December 2004. On 18 December 2004, the Central Kitsap Reporter ran an article that identified a Sailor assigned to the USS HENRY M. JACKSON was arrested for DUI on 4 December 2004. This Sailor was confirmed to b MM3(SS) G_(Applicant) and reaffirmed my decision to initiate administrative separation proceedings. I recommend MM3(SS) G_(Applicant) be administratively separated and be offered the most intensive alcohol treatment program available during the separation process.”
050201:  Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit Puget Sound, Silverdale, WA directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

         Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service (Performance and Behavior marks).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20050218 by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the available 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).

In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. Specifically, the Applicant contends that the proper Separation Authority did not discharge him. On 20050201 the Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit, Puget Sound directed that the Officer in Charge, Personnel Support Detachment, Bangor discharge the Applicant by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. According to MILSPERMAN 1910-182, the CO, TPU Puget Sound is a naval activity in CONUS to which members may be transferred to for separation processing. Further, according to MILPERSMAN 1910-152, Commands shall process for administrative separation all members considered to be a treatment failure. Any serious alcohol incident occurring subsequent to alcohol rehabilitation treatment is considered a treatment failure. Alcohol related incidents are offenses punishable by the UCMJ or civilian authority where, in the judgment of the member’s CO, the consumption of alcohol was the primary contributing factor. In the Applicant’s case, subsequent to his intensive outpatient alcohol treatment, he was found to be not fit for duty due to alcohol consumption on one occasion, and arrested for DUI. The separation process was in strict compliance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual. Relief denied.

The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by family problems that lead to his abuse of alcohol. 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 .

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. T he Applicant’s service was marred by a retention warning, which he violated with continued misconduct, and nonjudicial punishment proceeding for violations of Articles 92 (2 specifications) of the UCMJ. Violations of UCMJ Article 92 are considered serious offenses. In addition, civil authorities arrested the Applicant for 2 DUIs. 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 with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until 28 April 2005, 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 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500646

    Original file (ND0500646.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Statement listed as enclosure on the Commanding Officer’s undated letter, but not found in service record. ]UNDATED: Commanding Officer, USS SHILOH informed the Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERS-832) of the Applicant's discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. FA K_'s (Applicant’s) recent NAVPERS 1070/613 warning advised him that any future deficiencies in conduct; violations of the UCMJ, or conduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501531

    Original file (MD0501531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application to the Board:“The reason for my claim is that my command at the time did not put me into a proper after care program after the completion of my level 3 treatment. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980130 by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure (A) with a service characterization of general (under...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600401

    Original file (MD0600401.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Head of the Alcohol Rehabilitation Department stated that although the Applicant had not complied with his Aftercare plan, he was not considered a treatment failure unless he returned to drinking or had another Alcohol Related Incident (ARI).031009: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501118

    Original file (MD0501118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01118 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050621. I work two jobs. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500720

    Original file (ND0500720.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-00720 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050317. Relief denied.The record does not document NJP for the drug use that resulted in the Applicant’s administrative discharge or the administrative discharge process. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600048

    Original file (ND0600048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Port Orchard Clinical Psychology Center, W_ J. C_, Ph.D., dtd May 20, 2004 Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19980513...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00673

    Original file (ND04-00673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable, the reason for the discharge be changed to “alcohol abuse,” and “I respectfully request for the Board to take into consideration of changing my re-Entry code based upon my perseverance and dedication to making things right in my life with the Navy.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. However, due to his failure to follow his medically prescribed and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00550

    Original file (ND02-00550.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I have worked in the same field since leaving the Navy and I'm responsible for my actions.I'm asking to have my discharge upgraded because I was so young and made mistakes but my hope is to not have this held against me my whole life. No indication of appeal in the record.910520: USS PUGET SOUND (AD 38) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and alcohol abuse rehabilitation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500925

    Original file (MD0500925.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. They kicked me out for alcohol rehabilitation failure. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, falls well below that required for an honorable characterization of service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600095

    Original file (ND0600095.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 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