Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00240
Original file (MD00-00240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00240

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991207, 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 000824. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ INVOL DIS (BOARD WAIVED (MISCONDUCT) DRUG ABUSE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. I'm requesting a change of discharge in order for me to obtain a descent job in the field that I been preparing my self through my life.

2. As you can see in Documents (1,2,3) I been for the last four years studying and preparing myself as a Aviation Mechanic, but is beign very difficult for me to obtain a job in the aviation field because of my discharge.

3. That's why I'm suggesting a review of the one in order for me to obtain a descent job in the aviation field, so I can collaborate with my skills.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Aviation Maintenance Technician Certification (Powerplant)
Aviation Maintenance Technician Certification (Airframe)
Copy of Mechanic Certificate from Department of Transportation
Copies of DD Form 214 (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                910962 - 920824  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920825               Date of Discharge: 940823

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 11 29
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 58

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.06 (8)             Conduct: 4.0(8)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Expert Badge, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE/INVOL DIS (BOARD WAIVED) (MISCONDUCT) DRUG ABUSE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910926:  Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.
940519:  NAVDRUGLAB [SAN DIEGO, CA], reported applicant’s urine sample, received 940513, tested positive for [THC].

940531:  Counseled concerning your illegal use of a controlled substance, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) as evidenced by NAVDRUGLAB message 192112Z May 94, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
940609:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongfully used a controlled substance, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).
 Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and
extra duties for 45 days, (restriction for 45 days suspended for 6 months), reduction to PFC. Not appealed.
940615:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by illegal use of drugs.
940616:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

940630:  Director, Consolidated Substance Abuse Control Center evaluation indicates applicant was found to be a drug abuser by substance abuse counselor, recommended Level I/Prevent education.

940712:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent.

940713:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The factual basis for this recommendation was your one non-judicial punishment which evidenced your illegal use of drugs.

940812:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

940817:  GCMCA [Commanding General] directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 940823 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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).
In response to applicant’s issues 1-3, the Board has no obligation to change the applicant's discharge in order to allow him to obtain better employment.
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 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. Paragraph 6210, Misconduct , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, ( MCO P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95.

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 112a, for drug abuse.
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      


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00886

    Original file (MD00-00886.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Not appealed.940215: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 940812: SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.940817: GCMCA [Commanding General] directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 940823 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A and B).

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00031

    Original file (MD02-00031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 920529 - 920913 COG Period of Service Under Review...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00986

    Original file (MD01-00986.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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).Issue 1. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00932

    Original file (MD03-00932.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. Not appealed.941006: NAVDRUGLAB San Diego, CA reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 940930, tested positive for THC.941107: Applicant notified of intended...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00912

    Original file (MD00-00912.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I tried to serve and, wanted to, but just couldn't or wasn't able to due to the fact I have so many issues. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found the applicant mistaken in his belief that “under current standards, applicant would not receive the type of discharge he did.” In fact, the Marine Corps policy on...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00425

    Original file (MD01-00425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00425 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010220, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A: Specification: Wrongful use of marijuana, a controlled substance. However, 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01003

    Original file (MD02-01003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01003 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020708, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00067

    Original file (MD00-00067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of Certificate of Commendation PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 940218 - 940822 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940823 Date of Discharge: 961011 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 01 17 Inactive: None ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00032

    Original file (MD02-00032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00032 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010926, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: 940226 – 970408: ARNG Period of Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00805

    Original file (MD01-00805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant used illegal drugs. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency (C, Part IV).