Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500688
Original file (MD0500688.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00688

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050316. 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 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 20050819. 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:

“I hope to get my RE-CODE changed, and hopefully re-enlist in the United States Marine Corp.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4), reissued 040503

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                991020 - 991108  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 991109               Date of Discharge: 010917

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 10 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17 (Parental Consent) Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rank: PFC                          MOS: 3531

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.1 (6)                       Conduct: 4.1 (6)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 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 :

991015:  Chief, Bureau of Medicine recommended waiver of physical standard for enlistment. Applicant had history of asthma. Waiver approved by Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Recruiting Command on 991018.
991019:  Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

991109:  Weight-waiver approved.
010619:  Applicant’s submitted a written confession of his use of marijuana “February 5 to June 8.”

 010706:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:
 Specification: At Camp Pendleton, or in the civilian community, on diverse occasions, did use marijuana.
Awarded forfeiture of $482.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days. Reduction in rate to E-1. Not appealed.
010802:  Naval Addictions Rehabilitation and Education Department Naval Hospital: Applicant refused evaluation prior to discharge. Applicant admitted use of “marijuana, coke, ecstasy twice a week.” Applicant acknowledged understanding of availability of VA treatment.
010806:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by your verbal and written statement that you had used marijuana on repeated occasions.
010806:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

010816:  Commanding Officer, 1 st Combat Engineer Battalion, recommended to Commanding General, 1 st Marine Division (REIN), Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The factual basis for this recommendation was the verbal and written statement that the applicant had used marijuana on repeated occasions. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): On 19 Jun 01, during a interview, Private First Class B_ (Applicant) willfully made a verbal and written statement to 1 st Sgt M_, that he has used marijuana in the Marine Corps on many occasions. On 6 July 2001… [the Applicant] stated he had used it [marijuana] the previous weekend. At that time, Private B_ consented to provide a voluntary urine sample. The results of the voluntary urinalysis was negative. On 2 August 2001 drug paraphernalia (papers, ecstasy necklace, etc.) was found in Private B_’s room during a field-day inspection. PMO arrived on the scene, confiscated the paraphernalia, but made no arrest.
         Private B_ (Applicant) is a below average Maine. Along with his admitted regular drug use, he is currently on weight control. I have met and talked with him on several occasions. Private B_ (Applicant) is indifferent about being a Marine and cannot/will not affirm that his illegal drug use is over.

010821:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

010821:  Commander, 1 st Marine Division (Rein), advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMSB), Headquarters, that the Applicant will be discharged 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 20010917 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).

 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. The Applicant’s violation of the special consideration given to the Applicant in light of the Applicant’s weight and medical waivers was dually noted by the Board. Relief denied.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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

C. 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0501274

    Original file (MD0501274.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501420

    Original file (MD0501420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). After I told the men in my command that I had taken the drugs. The NDRB advises that there was no impropriety in his administrative separation for misconduct due to drug abuse, despite the evidence of record showing that the Applicant’s test result came back negative for controlled substances.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600472

    Original file (MD0600472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00472 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060210. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). (Applicant) reported positive urinalysis was in error and he has not used marijuana since enlisting in Marines.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600399

    Original file (MD0600399.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After being there for a few months I found out our Battalion was going to get deployed to iraq. Mandatory processing for separation is required for Marines who abuse illegal drugs.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501003

    Original file (MD0501003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My name is J_ V_ B_ (Applicant), I am requesting that my Bad Conduct Discharge, from the United States Marine Corps, be upgraded to a General/Under honorable conditions. Nevertheless, t he action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency when a discharge is adjudged by a court-martial case. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s available records and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency is not warranted.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00322

    Original file (MD04-00322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00322 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031210. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. (Applicants signature) 2003/11/20.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00126

    Original file (MD02-00126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00126 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011017, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 010202: Applicant notified of intended recommendation that suspended discharge be vacated and applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.010302: Commanding Officer recommended vacation of discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500552rtf

    Original file (MD0500552rtf.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. “I, B_ R. K_ (Applicant), am requesting an upgrade from OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS to GENERAL/UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS so that I can be re-instated into the United States Marine Corps. Mandatory processing for separation is required for Marines who abuse illegal drugs.

  • 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0501492

    Original file (MD0501492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Applicant chose not to make a statement.940526: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): Specification 1: In that PFC C. R. B_(Applicant), did, at Bldg 217, Camp Foster, Okinawa, JA, at 0035, on or about 22 May 1994, fail to obey a lawful order, to wit: RegtO P11000.1 dtd 5 Sep 1989, by wrongfully escorting a female guest into the BEQ (Bldg 217) after visiting hours (2200). This conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the...