E

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

 ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00639

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050228.  The Applicant requests the 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050629.  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)/ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6209.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “To receive and be able to use the Montgomery GI Bill.  I was discharged for failing ATF.  Alcohol Treatment Facility.  Alcoholism is a medical Disease and I never got in any trouble I had Ø NJP’s and only one page 11.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214  (Member 4)
Applicant’s DD Form 214  (Member 1)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USMCR(J)		000712 - 000910	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000911		Date of Discharge:  030429

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  07  19
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  62

Highest Rank:  LCpl			MOS:  1371

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.4 (6)			Conduct:  4.3 (6)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, RMB

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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:

011023:	Continuing Care Coordinator, Alcohol Treatment Facility, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune advised Commanding Officer 8th Engineer Support Battalion that Applicant missed his appointment for Continuing Care on 22 Oct 01 at the Alcohol Treatment Facility.  Unauthorized absences are grounds for termination from treatment.
011101:	Letter from Continuing Care Coordinator, Alcohol Treatment Facility, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune advised Commanding Officer 8th Engineer Support Battalion that Applicant missed his appointment for Continuing Care on 29 Oct 01 at the Alcohol Treatment Facility.  Unauthorized absences are grounds for termination from treatment.

021112:	Admitted to Intensive Outpatient Care, SARD, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune, NC:  Patient was in treatment for 11 days and discharged on December 03, 2002 as a treatment failure with a poor prognosis due to drinking throughout treatment and his lack of desire to make changes in his life in regards to his alcohol use.

021125:	Applicant acknowledged being not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of November and December because of lack leadership.

021204:	Medical evaluation by Alcohol Treatment Facility Naval Hospital:  Failure of treatment for alcohol abuse.
	Recommendation by Medical Officer:  Patient failed Level II ETOH two times – Recommend he attend Level III In patient – Upon interview, patient states no motivation to quit drinking and does not desire further treatment.  Discussed seriousness of his drinking and the effects it will have upon him.  Patient still denies treatment.  It is my recommendation that patient be administratively separated from Active Duty.

021209:	Commanding Officer received a discharge letter from the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program:  The patient was in treatment (11) days and treatment services included (8) group sessions, (2) individual sessions (1) AA meeting and didactic classes to include: Resources and Activities, Anger Management, Family Roles, Goal Settings, Relapse Triggers, Communication, Nutrition, Disease Process, and Spirituality.  
	The patient was discharged as a treatment failure with a poor prognosis due to his drinking throughout treatment and his lack of desire to make changes in his life in regards to his alcohol use.
	Discharge diagnosis is:  Alcohol Dependence
	Continuing care recommendations:  Patient should remain abstinent from alcohol and be processed for administrative separation.

030306:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, with the least favorable characterization of service possible of general under honorable conditions.

030306:	Commanding Officer, 8th Engineer Support Battalion recommended discharge with a general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Alcohol treatment failure, refused level III treatment.  The factual basis for this recommendation was the letters from substance abuse rehabilitation.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim):  Lance Corporal W_ (Applicant) has been a Marine for two years.  Lance Corporal W_ (Applicant)’s actions indicate that he has not matured as a Marine during his time in the Maine Corps.  He has shown a pattern of alcohol abuse, a lack of responsibility, and an inability to up hold our core values, while in this command.  In enclosures (3)  [Statement of NCOIC, Sgt A_ dtd 03 March 03] through (4)  [Statement of NCO, Cpl H_ dtd 03 March 03] Lance Corporal W_ (Applicant)’s superiors express their observations of his performance.  It is obvious that Lance Corporal W_ (Applicant) after serving two years and six months in the Marine Corps, can only be relied on to perform his duties if he is under immediate supervision.  He has been counseled on one occasion with hopes that he might be salvageable.  Lance Corporal W_ (Applicant) has only responded with apathy; He continues live by his own rules, resisting all and any means of conformity.  Lance Corporal W_ (Applicant) is intelligent, but fails to apply his experience and intellect to benefit the Marine Corps, he does his best to undermine the system every chance he gets.  Although he is approaching his EAS next year, after reviewing enclosures [(5)  [Chronological Record of Medical Care, (6) Letter from the substance abuse rehabilitation program, (7) Treatment Summary], I feel that a general discharge is warranted.  Not only has he served less than honorably.  I believe his continued presence will negatively influence the morale and welfare and retention of his peers and subordinates. 

030310:  	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with qualified counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

030403:	Commanding Officer, 2d Force Service Support Group (Rear) concurs with the recommendation of the Commanding Officer, 8th Engineer Support Battalion that Lance Corporal D_ D. W_ (Applicant) be separated with a general (under honorable) characterization of discharge.

030424:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

030424:	Commanding General, II Marine Expeditionary Force advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMSB) that the Applicant will be discharged by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure and the characterization of service will be general (under honorable conditions).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030429 with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service 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).

Issue 1.  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.  The Applicant’s service was marred by Level II alcohol rehabilitation failure on two occasions in addition to the Applicant’s refusal to attend Level III treatment.  The Applicant’s Commanding Officer indicated that the Applicant, “does his best to undermine the system every chance he gets.”  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 Marine Corps 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 employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  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 Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any relevant documentation for the Board to consider.  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.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1600.19F), effective 01 Sep 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6209, ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE.
 
B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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