Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01313
Original file (MD02-01313.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-01313

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20020910, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Center, Texas 75935. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. area. The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation by the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20030812. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct-Drug abuse (administrative discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues, as submitted

1. I did serve in Dessert Storm and received awards and decorations. My discharge was a result of offenses committed prior to this service.

2. I was so close to finishing my four years that it was unfair to give me the type of discharge that I received.

3. The discharge is improper because it is based on offenses which were related to my alcoholism, which progressively grew worse at my first duty station, Okinawa, Japan. This condition impaired my ability to serve. I now attend A.A. and wish to remain sober to improve my life. I also want to do the will of God and not my own.

4. I would like to have my discharge upgraded so I can use my G.I. Bill and further my education to pursue a better life and be of service to others.

 5. Applicant indicated above requested that Veterans of Foreign Wars act as counsel concerning his application. His records were reviewed on 7/18/03 and the following comments are hereby submitted.

We concur with the Applicant’s contention that his discharge be upgraded, since his discharge, he has received certificates of recognition for completion of the World Bible College and a Credit Certificate from Emmaus Bible College. We ask the Board to consider this post service in your decision.

We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the Applicant's discharge be reviewed for upgrading his discharge to a general discharge.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Certificate of Recognition from World Bible School (2)
Credit Certificate from Emmaus Bible College, dated January 30, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                871105 - 880118  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880119               Date of Discharge: 911029

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 09 11
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 38

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.1 (10)                      Conduct: 3.8 (10)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, SASM with 1 Star, MM, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS /Misconduct-Drug abuse (administrative discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890118:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Absent from place of duty on 1300-1325, 880112.
Awarded forfeiture of $150.00 per month for 1 month, correctional custody for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
890522:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Inability to maintain his military identification card and meal card. PFC (Applicant) lost 2 (two) ID cards on 890515 and 890518 consecutively and 2 (two) Meal Cards on 881017 and 8900515.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
900124:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121:
 Specification: Wrongfully appropriate one (1) pair of cuticle scissors and one (1) address book, for a total of $10.40 on 1615, 891213.
Awarded forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 30 days, reduction to PFC. Not appealed.
901127:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Driving while under the influence of alcohol, violation of general rules and regulations, i.e., Tijuana curfew violation, failure to obey rules and regulations governing the discipline of the Armed Forces, and frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civilian and military authorities.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
901231:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Driving on base with suspended driving privileges.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
910520:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A:
 Specification: Wrongfully used marijuana on or about 910103.
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to PFC. Forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 2 months restriction and extra duty for 30 days suspended for 6 months. Not appealed.
910703:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse.
910703:  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.

910805:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse. The factual basis for this recommendation was three NJPs of which one evidenced the illegal use of marijuana.

910808:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 123:
 Specification: Forged an official document by altering his light duty chit on 910717.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 107:
Specification: False official statement by telling GySgt that he did not forge his light duty chit on 910717.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Absent from appointed place of duty on 1500, 910717 to 0715, 910718.
Awarded forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Restriction and extra duty suspended for 6 months. Not appealed.
910916:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant to be an alcohol/drug abuser, not alcohol/drug dependent.

911008:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

911009:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 1 st Force Service Support Group] 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 19911029 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).

Issues 1-5. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Despite the positive aspects of the Applicant’s record and his completion of the majority of his enlistment contract, drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant’s alcohol abuse does not excuse his misconduct. Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.

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 inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity 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. 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 thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. E vidence of continuing educational pursuits, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the offense for which he was discharged. Relief not warranted.

The Applicant 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.



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. 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 “ 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00196

    Original file (ND02-00196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00196 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00983

    Original file (ND99-00983.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    970717: Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant not to be drug dependent so drug abuse treatment is not indicated. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970801 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00584

    Original file (ND04-00584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Therefore, no relief will be granted.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. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00462

    Original file (ND04-00462.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00462 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040121. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01189

    Original file (ND03-01189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00714

    Original file (ND00-00714.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00714 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000510, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The applicant’s second issue states: “I am not saying my discharge was improper for my actions, at the time I did them, but now that I am older, wiser, mature, and educated I feel I should receive a discharge review.” The NDRB is authorized to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00656

    Original file (ND02-00656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00656 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020411, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Upon reading this, for whoever it may concern, please understand I was young and made very bad decisions please consider my upgrade, because if...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00166

    Original file (ND01-00166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001127, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief is denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “The truth is I had requested 4 times with a request chit to be discharged from the service prior to my Captains Masts. My request is to have an honorable discharge, Thank you.” The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record and found no impropriety or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00005

    Original file (ND00-00005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I've submitted this as an enclosure to show that I wasn't a problem sailor my entire enlistment. I'm still attending meetings and have changed my life dramatically.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00009

    Original file (ND01-00009.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 Seven pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 891031 - 900430 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900501 Date of Discharge: 920813 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 03 13 Inactive:...