Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501035
Original file (MD0501035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMCR
Docket No. MD05-01035

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050601. The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051020. 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 application and from an attached document/letter to the Board:

“My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 29 months of otherwise excellent service in the U.S.M.C. Reserves.”

“Dear Board of Review,
I am requesting a change in the characterization of my discharge from “Other than Honorable” to “Under Honorable Conditions”. I feel my discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 29 months of otherwise excellent service in the U.S.M.C. Reserves.

I served for 29 months in the Marine Corp Reserve. I was a field radio operator and performed my duties to the best of my ability. I was awarded the national Defense Service Medal for serving during Desert Storm. I was also a licensed Hum-V driver with responsibility for the vehicles care. During the last year I served, I was selected for a T.A.C.P (Tactical Air Command Party).

The isolated incident I am referring to was testing positive for marijuana use. This incident happened when I was on leave and at a party. I was 21 years old and had a little too much alcohol to drink. I used extremely poor judgment in trying some marijuana. The next week I was called to do a random drug test. I’ve regretted that poor decision for the last 11 years. If I could go back and change that night at the party, I would. I love the Marine Corps and I would never have done anything intentionally to discredit it or myself. I am ashamed of my behavior and my separation from the Marines.

Since my separation from the military, I have turned my life around. I attended college and have received a degree in Criminal Justice. I plan to enter the Oakland County Police Academy this fall. I go to church on a regular basis and have changed spiritually. I’ve donated some of my time to my church by installing ceramic tile on the church’s baptismal fountain. Drugs are not a part of my life.

I’ve matured and grown in many ways since leaving the marine corp. But my military record is keeping me from applying for civil service jobs such as Police Officer or Corrections work. I would like to apply my college degree to one of these careers. I can only be considered for a position, if I have an Honorable Discharge.

I ask this review board to upgrade my discharge characterization from “Other than Honorable” to “Under Honorable Conditions ”

Respectfully,

[signed] J_ J. G_ (Applicant)”

 Applicant’s Remarks: “I pray that this board of review will upgrade my discharge to an “Honorable” or “Under Honorable Conditions” characterization.”
________________________________________________________________________
 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Letter from P. B_, Human Resources Specialist (Military) dtd February 11, 2005
Commanding General Discharge Authorization dtd November 17, 1993
Letter of Recommendation from Rev R_ J. J_, Pastor dtd May 16, 2005
Letter of Recommendation from J_ J. G_, Applicant’s father
Transcript from Oakland Community College (2)
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: None
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19900726             Date of Discharge: 19931129

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 00 03 02
         Inactive: 03 01 01

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

 Age at Entry: 17 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 55

 Highest Rank: LCpl                                  MOS: 2531

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.2 (4)                       Conduct: 4.1 (4)

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Rifle Expert Badge, National Defense Service Medal.


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 6210.5.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

920731:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Did on or about 2230, 920729 while attached to StudCoB, MCCES, MCAGCC violate CCO 1720.1C, to wit: by drinking under the legal age of twenty-one.
 Award: Reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). Not appealed.
930928:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 930922, tested positive for THC.

931017:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: In that SNM did wrongfully use marijuana as found evident by a urinalysis conducted on 930919, Batch #9307 Specimen #06 which tested positive for THC.
         Award: Reduction to PFC, forfeiture of $40.00 per month for 1 month (forfeiture suspended for 6 months). Not appealed.

931017:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of wrongful use of a controlled substance. The factual basis for this recommendation was positive result of unit urinalysis.

931017:  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.

931017:  Commanding Officer/Inspector-Instructor, Headquarters and Service Company, 1st Battalion, 24th Marines, Detroit, MI via Commanding Officer/Inspector-Instructor, 1st Battalion, 24th Marines, recommended Applicant’s discharge with an under other than honorable conditions by reason of wrongful use of controlled substance.

931116:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

931117:  GCMCA, Commanding General, Marine Reserve Force, New Orleans, LA, informed the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMSB-20), that the Applicant was directed 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 19931017 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 Applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident. Whenever a Marine is involved in misconduct due to drug abuse, on the first offense, commanders shall process the Marine for administrative separation. Characterization of service normally shall be under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant’s records show clear evidence that he used illegal drugs. Indeed, the Applicant received nonjudicial punishment on 19931017 for violation of UCMJ Article 112a Wrongful use of controlled substance. While misconduct due to drug abuse is enough to warrant a characterization of service as under other than honorable, it is instructive to note that the Applicant’s records also show that he received nonjudicial punishment on 19920731 for violation of UCMJ Article 92 Failure to obey regulations by drinking under the legal age of twenty-one. This service record entry contradicts the Applicant’s contention of one infraction during this period of enlistment. The Board found that the Applicant’s service was equitably characterized. Relief on this basis is denied.
The Applicant informs the Board that his present characterization of service has prevented him from applying for civil service jobs. The Applicant is advised that 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. Since this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief, relief on this basis is not warranted.

The following is provided for the Applicant’s edification. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question, but the Board found no such impropriety or inequity. While 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 Marine Corps, the Board 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. 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. The Applicant submitted two character references and a college transcript for consideration. The Applicant is advised that his efforts need to be more encompassing to include verifiable employment records, documented community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle. At this time, there is not sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in his characterization of discharge. And so, no relief is granted on this basis.

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 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 5420.174D 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 | 2003_Marine | MD03-00777

    Original file (MD03-00777.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 at the time of issue. Changes 2 – 6 not applicable to SPD Codes or Narrative Reason for Separation) GKK1 Misconduct-Drug abuse (with admin discharge board)HKK1 Misconduct-Drug abuse (admin discharge board required but waived) Characterization of service is written “HONORABLE”, “ UNDER...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600273

    Original file (ND0600273.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). My only concern is making the best life possible for my family because right now it’s all that I’ve got.The main reason I’m respectfully requesting an upgrade to my discharge is that I cannot and will not get a good job with this hanging over my head. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600340

    Original file (MD0600340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01148

    Original file (MD04-01148.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    They always tell you in boot camp that “Once a Marine, always a Marine”, but as soon as an individual makes one stupid mistake, that’s it, no second chances and that to me does not justify the saying. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. The Board found no indication in the record or in the documents submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was denied his proper due process.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600289

    Original file (MD0600289.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thank you , M_ K_ (Applicant)” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214Applicant’s DD Form 215Additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant by facsimile on 20061030, was also considered:Facsimile cover sheet from A_ H_, dtd October 30, 2006Character reference letter from Pastor C_ N_, dtd October 25, 2006 Letter from M_ S_, MS, Substance Abuse Counselor, B_ Health Care,...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01016

    Original file (MD99-01016.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    961120: Applicant advised of his rights and not having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.961125: Commanding officer recommended 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).In the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00517

    Original file (MD04-00517.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00517 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040209. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600040

    Original file (ND0600040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00040 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051004. 990820: Commanding Officer, USS CARL VINSON (CVN 70), recommended the Commander, Carrier Group THREE, that the Applicant be discharged with under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by his nonjudicial punishment imposed on 15 July 1999 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a. The Applicant is advised that the Veterans Administration determines...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00836

    Original file (MD04-00836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00836 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040421. I have two requests from the discharge review board. (f) (1).As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is also a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00630

    Original file (MD04-00630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. During that inspection LCpl B_ blew in a breathalyzer with a result of .06. The NDRB is authorized, however, 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.