ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20071029
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  
Authority for Discharge:  MARCORSEPMAN 

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19870402 - 19870407  		Active:  
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  19870408		   Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months		Date of Discharge:  19921029
Length of Service:    Years    Months  22  Days	     Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  77
MOS:  6046  	Highest Rank:   			Fitness reports:  
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):	  ()/ ()
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  Rifle  (4th)  (W/2 STARS) KLM    SOSR LOA

Periods of UA/CONF:  

ARREST:  1
	19920321:  Offense: DWI refusal and driving on a North Carolina state revocation.  Applicant held on a $700.00 secured bond.
	Court date:  19920420.

CC:  
	19880830:  Offense: Driving while intoxicated and no operator’s license.
	Sentence:  Fined $100 and court costs, jail for 60 days and non-operation of a vehicle for 30 days.  Jail suspended.

6105 Counseling:  
	19870902:  For alcohol related incident.
	19870902:  For failure to take antabuse.
	19870902:  For failure to attend Level III treatment.
	19880711:  For numerous alcohol related incidents over the past 14 months.  Most recently DWI arrest.
	19880711:  For continued use of alcohol.  My completion of Level III treatment in November 1987, subsequent relapse and ultimate DWI has resulted in MCAS JDACC reevaluation and determination of Level III aftercare treatment failure and recommendation for administrative separation.
	19920622:  For alcohol related incident: specifically, DWI refusal on 19920420, by North Carolina State Patrol.

MEDICAL:
	19870719:  Applicant admitted to psychiatric ward due to suicide attempt.  Applicant slit left wrist with scissors following drinking 24 beers; applicant claims it was just a scratch.
	
	19870719:  Applicant diagnosed as alcohol abuser and borderline personality disorder.  Applicant admitted to four (4) previous suicide attempts.
	
	19870901:  Applicant determined to be alcohol dependent/abuser with suicidal behavior.  Borderline personality disorder.  Recommend Level III rehabilitation.
	
	19880404:  Applicant diagnosed as treatment failure.

MEDICAL (cont):

	19881007:  Applicant referred by command for psychiatric evaluation.
	Impression: ETOH abuse, psychological dependence.  Mixed drug abuse on remission.  Borderline personality trait with mixed personality disorder.
	Recommendation:  Administrative separation.
	
	19920630:  Applicant diagnosed as alcohol dependent and recommended for administrative discharge.

TREATMENT:
	19870930:  Level III treatment.
	
	19871123:  Applicant completed Level II treatment.  Assigned to 12 month aftercare.
	
	19880311:  Applicant referred to JDAC after five (5) alcohol related unauthorized absences of 1 to 5 hours while assigned to mess duty.  Applicant failed to see squadron SACO on reporting.
	
	19880506:  JDAC requests applicant be reassigned to aftercare program saying applicant no monitored first time.
	
	19880829:  Aftercare terminated due to not abstaining from alcohol and not working a recovery program.
	
	19920805:  Applicant declined any treatment offered from the Veteran’s Administration for alcohol in connection with administration discharge.

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):  19950213
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:  MD94-00801
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:  Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.

Applicant Testified:  
Applicant Available for Questions:  
Witnesses:        
Observers:        
Types of Documents Submitted

Related to Military Service:	DD 214:  	Service and/or 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 Member of Congress:  
Other Documentation (Describe):   

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16D), effective 27 June 1989 until 17 August 1995, 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, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  Feels General Discharge should be upgraded due to quality of overall service.
2.  Desires Narrative Reason for Separation to be changed to Secretarial Authority.
3.  Post service conduct.

Decision

Date:  20080922	    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 Applicant feels that his overall quality of service to include time in Southwest Asia in support of the Gulf War warrants an “Honorable” characterization.  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.  An “Honorable” discharge characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel.  A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweigh positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s service record was marred by two DWI convictions, alcohol rehabilitation failure and numerous 6105 retention warning counseling entries.  While the Applicant may have performed his technical duties proficiently, his conduct both on and off-duty is also weighed heavily when considering the characterization of service.  A DWI is a criminal offense, specifically violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 111, which is punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and up to   and six months imprisonment if adjudicated as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial.  Although the Applicant was found guilty by civilian authorities of two Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) incidents during the course of his enlistment, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administration separation.  

At the time of his discharge, based on his overall performance, the Applicant’s supervisors all recommended he receive a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” discharge; his performance while on active duty rated such a characterization.  It can be presumed the command determined it would not be equitable to award the Applicant an “Honorable” discharge, the same discharge given to Marines who faithfully serve their country without incident.  The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate. 

:  ()  .  The Applicant requests the narrative reason for his discharge be changed from Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure to Secretarial Authority.  The Applicant completed Level III treatment in November 1887.  During the Applicant’s military service, he suffered two documented incidents of alcohol rehabilitation failure.  The first alcohol rehabilitation failure, a DWI, occurred in July 1988 and the second failure, another DWI, occurred in March 1992.  Both DWI’s resulted in civil convictions.  Based on this, the Applicant appropriately received Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure as the narrative reason for his discharge.  The Applicant provides no justification to change this or evidence that this narrative reason was issued in error.  The Board determined a change would be inappropriate.  

:  ()  .  The Applicant submits his post service conduct as justification to upgrade his characterization of discharge from “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” to “Honorable”.  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.   Supporting documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; 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 company’s or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements.   The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the 

reason for the characterization of discharge.  The key word here is “Outstanding”.  The Board is looking for actions that go beyond simply daily living.  The Applicant provided letters of recommendation, documentation of a safe driving history and proof of a clean criminal record.  The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing.   Since the Applicant has been unemployed since 1999, his community service could have been more robust.   By his own admission, he has done little in that area over the past 6 years.  He produced no documentation to show he was enrolled in a higher education training program or any course of instruction aimed at self-improvement.  Since his troubles were alcohol related, proof he participated in an Alcohol Anonymous program or other evidence of an alcohol free existence would have been welcomed.  The Applicant stated and provides information he suffers from a number of physical illnesses, which place limitations on his daily functions.  In fact, he does receive VA disability due to his illnesses.  Although these conditions are regrettable, they do not mitigate his conduct while on active duty.  The documentation provided by the Applicant was not sufficient to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge and the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.
 
After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,  Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  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 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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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.  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 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.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  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 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades - 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 may 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.  

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 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.  

Board Membership:  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