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

 ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00113

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000720.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE (no board not required), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6209.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I feel my discharge from the United States Marine Corps was inequitable because it was based on two incidents occurring as I served a period of three years of my military assignment.
I was told I would be discharged, but I was never given a firm date as to when it would occur.  I was allowed to stay on to complete the soccer season as a player.  As soon as the season was over I was told to pack up everything I owned immediately and given my discharge papers.
I feel someone, Master Sgt., Sgt. or Commanding Officer should have spoken to me and informed me before I was discharged.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		950612 - 950926	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950927		Date of Discharge:  980730

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  10  04
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  33

Highest Rank:  Cpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.6 (4)	*		Conduct:  4.6 (4) *

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, MUC with 1 Star, Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, Pistol Expert Badge (2)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*  2 sets of marks missing

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6209.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970923:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [DUI with a BAC of .14%.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

970924:	Medical evaluation indicates applicant alcohol dependent.  Recommend treatment.

971010:	Applicant refuses treatment for addiction. Informed treatment refusal will lead to a recommendation for expeditious processing for administrative separation.  Informed that if separated may get a less then fully honorable discharge.
  
971126:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111:
Specification: On 0151, 14Sep97, physically control a vehicle, to wit: a passenger car, while impaired with a BAC of .14% as shown by a chemical analysis.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 134:
Specification: Drunk and disorderly on 0140, 3Oct97.
Awarded forfeiture of $500.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 28 days and extra duties for 14 days.  Not appealed.

980421:	Medical reevaluation due to continue drinking in aftercare.  Recommend process for separation for alcohol rehab failure.
	AXIS I: Alcohol dependence.	
	
980423:	Consolidated Substance Abuse Counseling Center: Applicant considered an aftercare failure.

980601:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

980609:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.  Applicant was notified on 1Jun98 that he was to return acknowledgement of rights form no later than 9Jun98.  Applicant stated he understood that unless he returned the form before 1630, 9Jun98.  Applicant failed to return form and went on leave, when form was found it was unsigned. (extracted from undated, but signed, letter from CO, 7th MT BN)

980601:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.  The factual basis for this recommendation was your failure of alcohol rehabilitation by drinking during the treatment and failing to meet rehabilitative requirements.  

980715:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

980715:	Commander, 1st Force Service Support Group approved discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980730 general (under honorable conditions due to alcohol rehabilitation failure (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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 (C and D).

The applicant believes that his discharge “was inequitable because it was based on two incidents occurring”.  The applicant is correct in that he had 2 alcohol related incidents that resulted in his NJP.  However, the applicant initially refused treatment for his alcoholism and then, having completed treatment, continued drinking in aftercare.  Clearly this kind of conduct warrants discharge. 

The applicant alleges that he was never informed of his discharge.  The Board found that the applicant was notified of the intended recommended discharge on 980601. According to his CO, the applicant failed to return the form and went on leave. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E).  The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB.  The applicant must be aware that documentation of his sobriety must be provided to warrant consideration for clemency.   The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1600.19E), effective 950818 until Present, Paragraph 6209, ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE.
 
B.  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.  

C.  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.

D.  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