ex-IT2, USN

                  Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080215
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:  Characterization change to:
                   Narrative Reason change to:

                             Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:   USNR (DEP) 19860929 - 19870630   Active:     19870701 -
19940917
                       USN   19940918 - 19990331  HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  19990401     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20010416 Highest Rank/Rate:  IT2
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   16 Day(s)
Education Level:       AFQT:  43
Evaluation Marks:      Performance:  2.5 (2) Behavior:  3.0 (2)     OTA:
2.57

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):    Pistol    JMUA  NRMSM (2)

Periods of UA/CONF:

20000913:  Fleet Mental Health Unit, Initial Assessment.
      Diagnostic Assessment:
      Axis I: Alcohol dependence.
      Axis II: Deferred.
      Axis III: IBS, GERD, Hernia, Hemorrhoids, Broken Toes to Right Foot
      Axis IV: Problems with primary support group (relationship problems
with girlfriend)
            Occupational problems (discord with boss, job dissatisfaction);
financial stressors
      Axis V: Moderate symptoms and difficulty in functioning.
      Recommendation:  Strongly recommend referral to SARD for additional
      evaluation and treatment of alcohol dependence.  Applicant is
      recommended to attend 90 AA meetings in 90 days.  [Extracted from
      supporting documents provided by the applicant.]

NJP:        SCM:       SPCM:      CC:   Retention Warning Counseling:

                    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
                                         DD 214:    Service/Medical Record:
              Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
      Employment:                 Finances:
Education/Training:
      Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:
Criminal Records:
      Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:
References:
              Additional Statements:
                             From Applicant:       From Representation:
      From Congress member:
                    Other Documentation:

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

                             Applicant’s Issues

1. Wants reentry (RE) code “changed to a good mark.”
2. Letters he sent to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) were
rejected.
3. Trying to get a job.
4. He was harassed, abused, threatened and thrown out of the Navy by his
chief.
5. “Thrown off my boat with no trial and jury and no explanation.”

                                  Decision

Date:  20090625        Location:  Washington D.C.  Representation:

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

                                 Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of
an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service
and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  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.  The record
reflects no misconduct.  The following history on the Applicant was
extracted from his letter to the BCNR (undated):  1)  while assigned to the
USS WADSWORTH (FFG 9), he voluntarily asked the ship’s Drug Alcohol Program
Advisor for approval to attend treatment for his drinking problem,  2) he
was put in a program in less than a month after his request, 3) he was
evaluated by Fleet Mental Health Unit, Branch Medical Clinic, Naval Station
San Diego, California on 13 September 2000, 4) during this evaluation, the
Applicant complained of girlfriend problems and that his chief stressed him
out, 5) he was diagnosed as alcohol dependent and recommended for
additional evaluation and treatment at the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation
Department (SARD), and  6) he graduated from SARD (date unknown).

: (Nondecisional) 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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes.  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.

Issue 2: (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends he sent letters to BCNR
that were rejected by the executive director without a hearing; he wants to
know why this occurred.  The NDRB is not the reviewing authority for
matters acted on by the BCNR.  The Applicant should direct his inquires to
BCNR concerning matters he has previously submitted to them for redress if
he believes they have been nonresponsive to his request.

Issue 3: (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends he has been trying to get a
job.  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose
of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit
the NDRB review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the
discharge.

Issue 4: (Decisional).  ()  . In seeking a change in his narrative reason
for discharge, the Applicant claims he was harassed, abused and threatened
while on a ship and thrown out of the Navy within two hours by a chief who
hated him.  The Applicant submitted a personal statement indicating he
reported the chief’s abusive behavior to his commanding officer, an
investigation was done and the abusive behavior was confirmed.  The
Applicant’s medical record entry mentioned supra reflects the Applicant did
complain to his medical providers about his chief.  However, there is no
evidence in the record or provided by the Applicant to support his
statement that an investigation was conducted confirming the chief’s
abusive conduct or that the chief’s alleged abusive conduct was the
proximate cause of the Applicant’s overindulgence in alcohol.  To the
contrary, the evidence of record indicates the Applicant had been drinking
since age 15 and he continued to abuse alcohol despite receiving treatment.
 In the previously mentioned Fleet Mental Health Assessment of 13 September
2000 it indicates:  1) the Applicant admitted he had a long history of
alcohol dependence and had been drinking prior to reporting to the ship, 2)
he had a history of problems resulting from his abuse of alcohol as
evidenced by his two alcohol related arrests for driving under the
influence in 1993 and public intoxication in 1998, and 3) he had recently
been arrested in Tijuana after drinking approximately 6 beers with some
friends.  The NDRB has determined based on the preponderance of evidence
reviewed that there is sufficient evidence to support the basis for
discharge due to Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure.  Therefore, the
Applicant’s contention that his chief had him thrown out of Navy in two
hours is contradicted by the evidence of record and is without merit.

Issue 5: (Decisional).  ()  .  The Applicant contends he was “thrown off my
boat with no trial and jury and no explanation.”  The Applicant’s statement
to the BCNR indicates he approached his captain [commanding officer (CO)]
and requested to be “let out of the Navy” since he could not be transferred
to another command (to get away from the chief).  The CO allegedly informed
the Applicant that he would be discharged with an Honorable for Alcohol
Rehabilitation Failure based on his two alcohol related incidents: (1) for
being arrested in Mexico and (2) for drinking and being intoxicated before
treatment when ordered by the Command Master Chief not to drink before
treatment.  The Applicant’s DD Form 214, also reflects he was separated
with a characterization of Honorable for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure and
assigned a separation code of “HPD,” which indicates the Applicant waived
his right to an administrative board.  The presumption of evidence was
applied in this case due to the absence of an administrative separation
package.  The NDRB determined based on the Applicant’s own statement that
his [involuntary] discharge was directed by his CO and that he was not
arbitrarily kicked out of the Navy by a chief, but was provided notice of
administrative separation processing, waived his right to an administrative
board and was subsequently discharged.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the
Applicant’s summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the
Board found   Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall
and the narrative reason for separation shall remain ALCOHOL REHABILITATION
FAILURE.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a
period of fifteen years from the date of  discharge.  The Applicant is
directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional
Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service.

                          Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 27, effective
27 March 2000 until 21 August 2002,
Article 1910-152, 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.



                  ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe 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:  After a document review has been conducted, former
members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the
application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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.  There are veterans organizations such as the
American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are
willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to
obtain a discharge upgrade.  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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines
eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  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 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:  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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes.
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-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 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
 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