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

 ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00305

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the Disabled American Veterans.

Decision

A personal appearance discharge review hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030325.  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 at the time of issue.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE /Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  I received awards and decorations.

2.  I had combat service.

3.  My record of promotions showed I was generally a good service member.

4.  I had prior honorable discharges.

5.  My use of alcohol impaired my ability to serve.  Through the course of my career, alcohol dependency and abuse increased.

6.  The punishment I got at discharge was too harsh.  It was much worse than most people got for the same offense.

7.	We request equitable relief of the current discharge based on the good prior service of 
the member.

8.   We request consideration for post service activities to further improve the FSM’s present day situation.

Documentation

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

Applicant's DD Form 214 (current and previous enlistment) 
        Letter of recommendation from W_ N. C_ dated March 25, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USMCR(J)		720618 - 720717	COG
	Active:   USMC		720718 - 770117	HON
	Active:   USMC		770118 - 810416	HON
	Active:   USMC		810417 - 840227	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  840228		Date of Discharge:  871231

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  10  04
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  30			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  33

Highest Rank:  GySgt

Enlisted Performance Evaluations:  FITREPs were available for review.

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  AFOUR, SSDR with Star, GCM with 4 Stars, NAM, MM, MCEM with Star, Certificate of Commendation, NUC with Star, CAR, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  79

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

UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE /Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

840228:	Applicant reenlisted for 4 years.

851115:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0801-0930, 14Nov85.
Awarded forfeiture of $49.00 per month for 1 month.  Not appealed.

870815:	Applicant's driving privileges aboard MCAS, CPNC revoked/suspended for a period of 1 year.

870901:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111:
Specification: Driving while impaired (BAC .21%) on 0305, 15Aug87.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence 0731, 17Aug87 to 0730, 19Aug87 (1 day/surrendered).
Awarded forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months.  Not appealed.

870908:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 1201, 8Sep87.

871013:	Applicant in hands of civilian authorities, 1500, 13Oct87.

871125:	Applicant from unauthorized absence.

871231:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under conditions other than honorable by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

Separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 871231 under conditions other than honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial (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).

Issues 1-4, 6-7.  The Board agrees that the Applicant had previous honorable enlistments distinguished by combat service, and awards.  However, the Board found that even his solid prior service did not sufficiently mitigate his subsequent misconduct to warrant an upgrade to his final discharge.  The Applicant requested separation in lieu of trial by court-martial and the Board presumes that the Applicant understood the implications of his request.  All Marines separated in lieu of trial by court-martial normally receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and are reduced in rank if a NCO or above.  Relief denied. 

Issue 5.  While the Applicant may feel that his use of alcohol was a factor that contributed to his actions, the record is devoid of evidence that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

Issue 8.  The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country during his last period of enlistment.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.   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 civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  As the Applicant is aware, having three earlier periods of honorable service, military service is challenging and our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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.  The regulation does not clearly define this authority, but in fairness to those who have served honorably, the Board is very judicious in its application of this authority.  After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board acknowledges the positive direction the Applicant’s life has taken since his discharge.  He is to be commended for his completion of the South Baltimore Station program and his stated desire to turn his life around.  However, the Board determined that the Applicant’s evidence of post service accomplishments was insufficient to mitigate the character of his discharge.  Relief not warranted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16C), Change 2, effective 15 May 84 until 26 Jun 89.

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, unauthorized absence; and Article 111, driving while impaired.

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