Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500610
Original file (MD0500610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00610

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050216. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests 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 20050608. 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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “ My reason for requesting my discharge to be upgraded is to become a boston police officer. I need to have an honorable discharge to do so, I know I’m asking quite a lot, but I believe it would be a waste of gov. money and time to have all my training and experience go to nothing when I could do good for the community and put that training to good use. Since my discharge I’ve worked as a personal trainer. Using my knowledge of physical fitness to help people get back in shape and balance a healthy diet. And now I would like to be a police officer and help bad things from happening to good people which I’ve seen and heard many times.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
None were submitted.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                980831 - 990110  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990111               Date of Discharge: 020911

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 08 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 68

 Highest Rank: LCpl                         MOS: 0321

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.5 (12)                      Conduct: 4.5 (12)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MCGCM, NDSM, SSDR, LOA

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

980828:  Applicant briefed on the Marine Corps policy concerning the illegal use of drugs.
020626:  Applicant refused Medical Officer Evaluation.


020626:  Applicant provided with contact information for substance abuse treatment
                  at a VA treatment facility after his discharge.

020820:  Applicant, having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Art 27b, requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court- martial. In the request the Applicant noted that his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he understood the elements of the offenses. He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other honorable conditions. The Applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 112a: Did, at an unknown location, on or between 1-15 July 2002, wrongfully use ketamine, a schedule 1 controlled substances.

020906:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

020910:  GCMCA, Commanding General, 1 st Marine Division, determined that Applicant had no potential for further service, that separation in lieu of trial by court-martial was in the best interest of the service, and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

 Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020911 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial (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).

Issue 1. 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 should 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. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. Relief denied.

In a signed statement, the Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing. The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged. He admitted he was guilty of violating Article 112a, wrongful use of a controlled substance.


There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Mandatory processing for separation is required for Marines who abuse illegal drugs. 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.

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


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective
01 September 2001 until Present.

 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, wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances.
C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

 E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

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 “ 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 Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00824

    Original file (MD01-00824.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00824 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010530, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. H_ of base legal after I was acquitted of a General Court-Martial, a month or two later I was charged with a bogus urine sample which was later dismissed, than I was charged with Unauthorized Absence which I requested mast and it was dismissed. Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A. Paragraph 6419,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00495

    Original file (MD03-00495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 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 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01257

    Original file (MD99-01257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01257 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990930, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01320

    Original file (MD04-01320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-01320 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040818. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500450

    Original file (MD0500450.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Applicant’s résume Character Reference ltr from H_ W_, dtd January 27, 2005 [unsigned] Character Reference ltr from C_ T_, dtd January 27, 2005 [unsigned] Character Reference...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01215

    Original file (MD02-01215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01215 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020821, 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 (D and E). Relief not warranted.The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01208

    Original file (MD02-01208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01208 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020821, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. On 880812, the Applicant requested separation under conditions other than honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial. Even if the Applicant had accepted the special court-martial, the Board found no reason to believe that his discharge would have been anything except under conditions other...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00746

    Original file (MD03-00746.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00746 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030320. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :910731: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0630, 910603 to 0200, 910724.Awarded restriction and extra duties for 45 days (suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-1.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00926

    Original file (MD03-00926.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. CHARGE II: This charge is faulty because it is based upon the premise that an order was issued. Respectfully,” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Three pages from Applicant’s service record Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) Appointment of Veterans...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700124

    Original file (MD0700124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge ProcessElements of Discharge: [SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL] Date Charge(s) Preferred: 20030909 Charge(s) and Specification(s): Article 112A: Wrongfully use cocaine.Date Applicant Submitted SILT request: 20031004 Consulted with or Waived Counsel: Acknowledged Understanding Elements: Acknowledged Guilt to: Article(s) 112a BCD/DD authorized for offense(s) Acknowledged Consequences of OTH: Type of Characterization Requested: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)Commanding Officer...