Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00550
Original file (MD04-00550.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00550

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040212. 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 did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041022. 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, authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “The discharge is improper because in 20 months of service I had no other negative actions. My habits have changed and have a child now. I would like to serve again for my country and request my reentry code be changed. The past charges were lacking the severeness of the current circumstances for my actions. The effects are hurting my carrer status. I just want to go the right path through life. This would be greatly appreciated.”
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: USMC              None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                961029 - 961103  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 961104               Date of Discharge: 980626

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 07 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 64
Highest Rank: LCpl                         MOS : 3043

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.5 (6)                       Conduct: 4.3 (6)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC

 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 :

961026:  Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.
980518:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: At Orleans Hotel and Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada, 980329, having knowledge of MCO 1700.22D, violated the same by the wrongful underage consumption of alcohol in the state of Nevada; violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: At unknown location, did while on active duty on or about 980420, wrongfully use marijuana, a Schedule I substance; violation of UCMJ, Article 134: At Orleans Hotel and Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada, 980329, was conducting himself in a disorderly manner, which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit to the Armed Forces.
 Awarded forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to E-2. Not appealed.
980626:  Applicant discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse per MARCORSEPMAN par 6210.5 [Extracted from DD Form 214].

NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980626 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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 (B and C). The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (D).
Issue 1. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation. Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.
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.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. Normally, to permit relief, an inequity or impropriety must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such inequity or impropriety 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, to enhance employment opportunities, or for 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. Evidence 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 may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The Applicant did not provide any post documentation for the Board’s consideration. 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 P1900.16E), effective 31 Jan 97 until 31 August 2001.

B. 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.

C. 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.

D. 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.

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 | 2004 Marine | MD04-00092

    Original file (MD04-00092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00092 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031015. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Page from Applicant’s medical record Discharge summary from Philhaven Behavioral Health Care Services Letter of treatment from N_...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00316

    Original file (MD00-00316.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 980615: GCMCA [Commander, Marine Corps Base Hawaii] directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. In response to the applicant’s issue 5, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit re-entry into the Naval Service or any other of the Armed Forces.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00774

    Original file (MD03-00774.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00774 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.020328: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01071

    Original file (MD01-01071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB 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 One page from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 980312 - 980317 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00604

    Original file (MD02-00604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that partial relief is warranted after consideration of Applicant's character references from superior NCOs, the Commanding Officer's recommendation for retention, and proficiency and conduct markings. I have waited over two years to send this letter to the board so that I can have enough positive things to show on my resume to you.Attached are some statements from the platoon I was a part of during training stating on the procedure in which the urinalysis was run; in...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00703

    Original file (MD03-00703.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00703 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030310. "It also states on page 1-17 section 1202 item g “Return to full duty those Marines who successfully complete an appropriate treatment program.” and continues to item h “Process for administrative separation those Marines who do not successfully complete or refuse appropriate treatment programs or who are unable to achieve/maintain accepted Marine Corps standards of performance and/or conduct after...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00527

    Original file (MD03-00527.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.001212: NAVDRUGLAB San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 001201, tested positive for MDA/MDMA.001221: NJP for violation of UCMJ,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00639

    Original file (MD01-00639.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. 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). However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-01039

    Original file (MD00-01039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-01039 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000907, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. The Manual for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01157

    Original file (MD01-01157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding General directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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. The Board found no evidence that the applicant’s personality disorder was responsible for the applicant’s decision to use illegal drugs.