Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500976
Original file (MD0500976.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00976

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050516. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Indianapolis, IN. The Applicant designated American Legion as the 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 National Capital Region. The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.


Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060112. 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 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the attached document/letter to the Board:

I am writing this letter to appeal the decision in my case on receiving benefits so that I can take care of my medical problems that I suffered while enlisted in the Marine Corps.

I was told that the reviewing officer handling my case had mentioned two factors on his decision to decline my benefits. One was about my positive results on a urinalysis test at MEPs before I had joined the service. The other was that I had positive results twice while I was enlisted in the service. That is false statement to begin with. I had only one positive urinalysis result in October of 2003 and never again.

I believe that I deserve my benefits on the grounds that I served in the Marine Corps proudly, went over seas twice. The first time was on a six-month deployment and the other in Iraq. While overseas, a few of the awards I received were: Combat Action, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation, and a Presidential Unit Citation.

serve my country, I went to Iraq, I got meritorious mast on my deployment, and I did my job everyday. I would however, like to inform you on some things that you can not find in my records. When I came back from Iraq in late May of 2003, I was really stressed out about some things that happened during the war and before the war that because of that, I started drinking heavy and going out whenever I could and drinking more and more to relieve the stress.

While out in the field during training on July 26, 2003 I injured my right finger. Therefore, I got sent back to the rear that day while everyone else stayed to complete training. The following night, another Marine and I were watching TV in my barracks room and one thing led to another and we ended up getting in a fight with other Marines in the squad bays across from us. During that fight one thing led to another and I ended up kicking my left foot through a window as I was trying to kick him.

The reason why no one got into trouble for this incident was because of two reasons. 1) I am a Marine, and I don’t tell on other people when I get into a fight-win or lose, and 2) Because it was a pride thing I didn’t want anyone what really happened and the only people that do know is me, my buddy, and the guy that got into a fight with me.

After that incident, my command gave me a hard time about my injuries. I had to a lot of various hospital appointments for EMG’s, MRI’s, neurology, and so on. As I was beginning to try to get medical help, a few of my friends that were Navy Corpsmen had told me that my First Sergeant was telling the battalion MO to put my name at the bottom of the list for getting help. So, then knowing that no one would believe me over a First Sergeant, I just kept on going on with what they told me. I was also trying to go to appointments, but my command would make me go out into the field while I was un-trainable. So, there wasn’t much I could do.

In the month of October 2003 I began going out a lot and drinking to keep me sane. I remember going to a club one night in San Diego and me and some of my friends got involved with a group of girls and we ended up going with them to some party where I started drinking even more. Now like I’ve told everyone else, I don’t remember smoking marijuana but that was the only night I have ever blacked out and was told by others what had happened.

I got a court-martial in December of 2003 and served 30 days in the brig. When I got out of the brig I volunteered to go to rehab because my excessive drinking was a problem. When I got out of rehab, my command was still not letting me get the medical treatment that I still needed for my injuries. When I did have a chance to go to the hospital, the doctor told me she would not treat me because I was getting out with an Other Than Honorable Discharge.

So, I would just like to finish this statement by saying that I do take full responsibility for any of my actions, however, the reason I feel that I deserve my benefits is because I was still an active-duty Marine and I did get injured while I was in the Marine Corps. I went to the war and fought, so I believe that the VA should take care of my injuries without me having to pay for them. I would also like to say that I will at any time be willing to take a urinalysis test to prove to you that I am clean. I just want you to see that I only have good intentions in receiving my benefits and that you will hopefully give me a second chance so that I can move forward with my life.

Sincerely,

C_ A. S_(Applicant) (Not signed)

Representative submitted no issues.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Combat History/EXPED 142 Remarks
Medical Documents (22 pgs)
American Legion Cover Letters (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    20010122 – 20010122      COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20010123             Date of Discharge: 20040716

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 03 05 01 (Does not exclude lost time.)
          Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: none
         Confinement:              24 days

 Age at Entry: 21

 Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 59

 Highest Rank: LCpl                                  MOS: 0311

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.0 (8)                       Conduct: 4.0 (8)

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Combat Action Ribbon, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Expeditionary Medal Marine Corps, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation.


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 :

000907:  Applicant briefed on and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.
021223:  Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Jan, Feb, March 2003 promotion period because of lack of maturity. Applicant chose not to make a statement.

030212:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Art: 92 failure to obey an order, Art:134 disorderly conduct, drunkenness.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

030221:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Failure to have a proper shave, resulting in not upholding proper grooming standards while conducting fire watch.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
030727:  Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton, CA. Applicant to emergency room after
                  kicking a window with left foot, cutting calf. ETOH “a lot”. Diagnosis is
                  tibial nerve laceration.

031031:  NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 031024, tested positive for THC.

031202:  Applicant acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Dec 2003 Promotion period because of lack of judgement. Applicant chose not to make a statement.

031215:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a:
         Specification: Wrongful use of marijuana 031022.
          Finding: to Charge and the specification thereunder, guilty.
          Sentence: Confinement for 30 days.
         CA action 031215: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for that portion of the punishment adjudging forfeiture of $000.00 which is suspended for 0 months.

040116:  Applicant’s request to Commanding Officer for administrative separation. Applicant admits to being an alcoholic and that he used a controlled substance.

040121:  Naval Hospital, Camp Pendleton, CA. Applicant entered into partial hospitalization at the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program (SARP) Department with a diagnosis of Alcohol Dependence/Cannabis Dependence. Applicant referred by his command for positive Urine Drug Screen for THC on 031022.

040127:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Drug Abuse). Applicant advised that he is being processed for Administrative Separation due to drug abuse.

040128:  Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton, CA. Applicant to emergency room with chest pain and rapid heartbeat. Applicant states that for approximately two months, he has had one episode a day of Lt lateral chest pain, described as sharp, 7/10, with radiation to Lt neck and face. Applicant states that he gets short of breath with these and feels like his heart is beating very rapidly. Applicant had an episode at SARP this evening. Applicant states that he has had these episodes daily for approximately two months, which coincides to approximately two weeks after his last use of drugs.

040213:  Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton, CA. Applicant has positive screening for amphetamine. Specimen analysis was performed without chain of custody handling. The result should be used for medical purposes only and not for any legal or employment evaluative purposes.

040217:  Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton, CA. Applicant released from Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program. Exit diagnoses:
         Axis I: Alcohol Dependence, Cannabis Dependence, Adult Child of an Alcoholic
         Axis II: None
         Axis III: Sinusitis, Allergic Rhinitis
         Axis IV: Routine Military Service
         Axis V: GAF - 80

040610:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. The factual basis for this recommendation was due to the result or urinalyses.
040610:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

040615:  Commanding Officer, 3d Battalion, 1st Marines recommended Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions for misconduct of drug abuse.

040713:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

040713:  GCMCA, Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

040716:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Loosing his own military identification card), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, and advised being processed for administrative discharge action.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20040716 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (A) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. 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 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. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

When the service of a member of the U.S. Marine Corps has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. T he Applicant received 2 retention warnings and he was convicted by a summary court-martial for violation of UCMJ Article 112a (wrongful use of controlled substances). 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. Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.
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 Board found no indication in the record that the Applicant was inequitably or improperly denied treatment for his drug use. 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 summary of service clearly documents that misconduct due to drug abuse was the reason the Applicant was discharged. No other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. Relief denied.





The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. 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 post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective
01 Sep 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT.
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 | MD0500237

    Original file (MD0500237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I wasn’t as educated as a lot of my fellow marines who went through 4 years of high school and have attended a year or two in college . As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501315

    Original file (MD0501315.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). Discharged to command.2. th Marines, recommended Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of illegal drug use, specifically amphetamine and methamphetamine.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501153

    Original file (MD0501153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01153 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 200050628. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. By then it was too late, I had gone from being a meritorious Marine to facing an Other Than Honorable discharge from the United States Marine Corps, for one urinalysis failure.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501225

    Original file (MD0501225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01225 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050713. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). As such, it is my opinion that LCpl H_(Applicant) should be administratively separated from the Marine Corps.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501351

    Original file (MD0501351.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01351 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050810. 041108: Commanding Officer, School of Infantry, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, CA recommended Applicant’s discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of convenience of the government, specifically, personality disorder. 041123: GCMCA, Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, CA directed the Applicant's discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of personality...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00295

    Original file (MD04-00295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00295 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031201. My whole life was changed as result of this accident and I should have received an honorable discharge under medical conditions. The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his time in the military to warrant a change to “honorable.” The official records and the additional documents supplied by the Applicant, do not support his contention of a “cover up”...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01211

    Original file (MD04-01211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Anticipated disposition of the Medical Board is: Limited Duty for 8 months.031028: Evaluation at Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton Orthopedics Clinic: left knee pain, left hip pain, pain continues. st Force Service Support Group, directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of condition not a disability. A review of the Applicant’s records indicated an honorable discharge was warranted.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500727

    Original file (MD0500727.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. [signed] Applicant” Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (Disabled American Veterans):“Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00023

    Original file (MD03-00023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    920122: CORRECTIVE ADMIN ACTION: CG, 3d MARDIV directed CO, 4 PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19930420 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court-martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed by appellate review authority and executed (A and B). The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01099

    Original file (MD04-01099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-01099 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040616. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the narrative reason for separation changed to “preexisting medical condition.” The Applicant requests a documentary record review. With all of this I leave with you medical and other documents stating the facts of my situation.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the...