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

 ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00737

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000517, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The applicant listed the Veterans of Foreign Wars as his representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001201.  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.  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

1.  It is my contention that when I enlisted in the U.S.M.C., I was just an adolescent.  I had never been away from home, knew nothing about the world and was, unfortunately not street smart in any way, shape or form.  During my first nine months in the corps, I was first introduced to drugs.  Because of my age and insecurity and lack of knowledge, I indulged.  Subsequently, I became a discredit to the corps.  I did not receive any counseling while in the corps.

Subsequent to my discharge, my family (mostly my father) knew something was wrong with me.  At his insistence, I was evaluated at the Marion Citrus Mental Health Assessment Services and was diagnosed with Bi-Polar Affective Disorder Mixed, Unspecified and, also, with psychosis not otherwise specified.

It is my contention that these diagnoses were fundamental in the aggravation of the happenings, which began while on active duty in the corps.  My doctors and therapists have indicated to me that these diagnoses are developmental in nature and that I was born with them.  They just started coming to a head, while I was on active duty.

It is, therefore, sincerely requested that my request for an upgrade be considered in a favorable note, based upon the above and the attached medical evidence.

Thank you in advance for your favorable consideration in this matter.

2.  Request applicant's discharge be reviewed for upgrade based on post-service conduct.

On September 3, 1998 the applicant was diagnosed with Psychosis, not otherwise specified and history of polysubstance abuse, unspecified.

In October 1998 he was diagnosed with Bipolar affective disorder, mixed type and Polysubstance abuse continuous.  He is continuing treatment for Bipolar affective disorder.  As of Assessment completed November 15, 1999 the applicant denies further alcohol, drug abuse.  As Bipolar disorder is a developmental condition duty in the USMC only aggravated a pre-existing condition.  Because extensive mental assessments are not performed before enlistment the condition was not identified prior to his entry into the service.  There is a good indication this individual was unfit at the time of enlistment.  Request upgrade of discharge to General based on time served.

We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of progress notes from Marion Citrus Mental Health Assessment Services, dated August 10, 1998
Copy of psychiatric diagnostic assessment dated September 17, 1998
Copy of progress notes from Equal Access/Helping Hands Clinic dated August 9, 1999
Copy of psychiatric diagnostic assessment dated November 30, 1998
Copy of psychiatric diagnostic assessment dated January 25, 1999
Copy of progress notes dated October 18, 1999
Copy of progress notes dated November 15, 1999
Copy of Marion Citrus Health Center letter of November 17, 1999 signed by a medical records specialist
Letter of reference from applicant's father dated December 15, 1999
Letter of reference from applicant's uncle dated December 14, 1999
Letter of reference from applicant's sister dated December 15, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		950209 - 950226	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950227		Date of Discharge:  970616

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  03  20
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  57

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.0 (6)			Conduct:  4.1 (6)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, Letter of Appreciation

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  28 

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:

950202:	Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

970129:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence 0001, 17Dec96 until 0510, 14Jan97 (28 days).
Awarded forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days.  Forfeiture for $200.00 pay per month for 2 months suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

970426:	NAVDRUGLAB San Diego, CA, reported applicant’s urine sample, received 970418, tested positive for THC.

970513:	Vacate forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for 2 months awarded at NJP of 29Jan97.

970513:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A:
Specification: Wrongful use a controlled substance within five days of 970415, to wit: marijuana.
Awarded forfeiture of $505.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to PFC.  Not appealed.

970513:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

970513:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

970520:	Applicant refused medical officer's evaluation.

970520:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  The factual basis for this recommendation was your Battalion NJP that evidenced your illegal use of drugs. 

970611:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

970611:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 1st Marine Division (Rein)] directed the applicant's discharge 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 970616 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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 (C and D).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  The applicant claims that he was an adolescent, however, the Board found that he was 21 years old at the time he enlisted, clearly not an adolescent. While he may feel that his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his action, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied. 

The Board found that the applicant was counseled about the requirement that he be evaluated by a medical officer, for drug addiction, prior to his discharge, but refused such evaluation. He also refused treatment in conjunction with his discharge.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (B, Part IV), (issue 2).  However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered.  At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore no relief will be granted.  He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Relief denied.

The Board acknowledges the applicant’s diagnoses of Psychosis and Bipolar.  However, the Board found nothing in his records that indicated any medical problem existed.  In addition, these conditions do not affect one’s ability to distinguish right from wrong.  The applicant wrongfully used marijuana, a drug he knew was illegal.  Relief denied.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 to Present. 

B.  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.  

C.  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.

D.  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.

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