Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00121
Original file (MD02-00121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00121

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011017, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020701. 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/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues, as submitted

1. Upgrade discharge to Honorable.
2. To reverse decision on Summary Court martial.
a) return rank of E-4
3. Correct DD-214 #27 for eligible for re-entry.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Applicant's letter of intent to the Board (5 pages)
Copy of DD Form 214
 Certificate of Meritoriously Promotion to Corporal dtd 2 Dec 98
Certificate of Meritoriously Promotion to Lance Corporal dtd 2Mar 97
Certificate of Promotion to Private First Class dtd 1 Oct 96
Certificate of Marine of the Quarter Award dtd 30 Sep 98
Certificate of Good Conduct dtd 22 Apr 99
Certificate of Commendation dtd 8 Jun 99
Certificate of Commendation dtd 1 Oct 98
Certificate of Commendation dtd 8 Sep 98
Certificate of Commendation dtd 7 Sep 97
Certificate of Meritorious Mast dtd 4 Feb 97
Letter of Appreciation (CO, MCSS Schools, Camp Lejeune) dtd 18 Sep 96
Letter of Thanks (CO, Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squad 352) dtd 1 Feb 00
VMGR-352 Pro/Con markings dtd Feb 4, 2000
PRO/CON Recommendation undated
Certificate of Participation (Exercise Cobra Gold 97)
Letter of Recommendation from W_ R. C, LtCol, USMC, dtd 1 Oct 99
 Character Reference letter from B.H. H_, Maj, USMC, undated
 Letter of Recommendation for employment from C.J. L_, Capt, USMC, undated
Separation Authority (CG, 3d MAW) dtd 1 May 00
 Special Court-Martial proceedings (18 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                950920 - 960421  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960422               Date of Discharge: 000502

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 00 11 (Doesn't exclude confinement time.)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17 (Parental consent)       Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 74

 Highest Rank: Cpl
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency: 4.4 (12)             Conduct: 4.4 (12)

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: LoA, MM, SSDR (w/1 Star), CoC (4 th award), GCM, Marksman Rifle Badge

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970516:  Counseled regarding deficiencies, specifically, your disrespectful conduct towards an NCO on 28 Mar 97, lack of integrity on 8 May 97 and your failure to report to your assigned place of duty in a timely manner on 16 May 97. Necessary corrective actions explained. Sources of assistance identified. Disciplinary and administrative discharge warnings issued.
000329:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a (3 Specifications):
          Specification 1: wrongful use of marijuana (THC) from on or about Nov 97 to Sep 98.
          Specification 2: wrongful use of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) FROM ON OR ABOUT Nov 97 to Sep 98.
          Specification 3: wrongful use of methylenedioxy amphetamine/methylenedioxy methamphetamine (ecstasy) from on or about Nov 97 to Sep 98.
          Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 00.
          Specification:
          Findings: to Charge I and specifications 1, 2, and 3 thereunder, guilty.
          Sentence: Confinement for 1 months, forfeiture of ⅔ pay ($917.00) for 1 month, reduction to E-2.
          CA 000329: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
        
000329:  To confinement, sentence of SCM.
000421:  From confinement, to duty.
000407:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by your positive confirmation of wrongful drug use, to wit: Marijuana (THC), LSD and Ecstasy.
000410:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted 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.
000413:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

000428:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

 000501:  GCMCA [CG, 3 rd MAW] 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 000502 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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. The Board found the applicant’s accomplishments while on active duty do not mitigate his misconduct. The applicant used illegal drugs. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.
Issue 2. In response to the applicant’s issue, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The NDRB found the applicant’s service record devoid of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. Relief denied.

Issue 3. Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.
The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.






Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 Jan 97 until Present.

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 “ afls10.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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-01165

    Original file (MD01-01165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-01165 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010905, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. CA 000000: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD.990823: To confinement, Sentence of SPCM.990825: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00358

    Original file (MD00-00358.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00400

    Original file (ND00-00400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00400 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000210, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to The Secretary Authority. A gross injustice was done to me and therefore I ask for clemency.” The Board cannot judge how the Administrative Board may have felt at the time, nor is it this Board’s job to question the Administrative...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00036

    Original file (MD01-00036.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00036 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000927, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00969

    Original file (MD01-00969.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was unjust because my appeal was never reviewed prior to the Administrative discharge board.2. 990420: NJP imposed and suspended on 981217 for period of 6 months vacated and punishment ordered executed.990421: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Was UA from appointed place of duty on 12 Mar 99. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600032

    Original file (MD0600032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Extracted from DD Form 2807-1 dated 040407].040322: Commanding Officer, VMFA-321 recommended the Applicant’s under other than honorable conditions discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. Based upon supporting documentation, the administrative discharge board found that a preponderance of the evidence supported the Applicant’s misconduct and recommended separation under other than honorable conditions. On 20040322, the Commanding Officer, VMFA 321, recommended to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01088

    Original file (MD03-01088.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01028

    Original file (MD01-01028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Advise that administrative discharge processing mandatory.000816: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.000816: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600528

    Original file (MD0600528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The characterization of service directed was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00817

    Original file (MD00-00817.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00817 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000614, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. The Board did find several discrepancies in the service record concerning the applicant’s counselings, which became the justification for the applicant’s characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant states in her personal...