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

 ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD01-00999

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010730, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested 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 020215.  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-Drug abuse (with admin discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant
Reference Letter (2) 
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USMC		None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		850313 - 850324	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  850325		Date of Discharge:  870911

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  05  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  73

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.1 (1)			Conduct:  4.6 (1) [Extracted from SJA's Letter dtd 870818]

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, MM, COC, LOA, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS /Misconduct-Drug abuse (admin discharge board required but waived), authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

870610:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance (marijuana).
Awarded forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 21 days (suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-2.  Not appealed.

870624:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Illegal use of marijuana and/or other drugs].  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

870807:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

870807:	Applicant advised of her rights and having elected to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

870807:	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 wrongful use of a controlled substance, to wit: Marijuana.  This violation of article 112a of the UCMJ resulted in you receiving non-judicial punishment.  In addition to the illegal use of a narcotic substance a diagnosis by psychologist which conclude;  long standing problems with anger and authority conflicts stemming from growing up in an alcoholic, violent home.  The military represents to her all the negative aspects of her relationship with her father and she is likely to continue to be a disciplinary problem unless discharged.  She has no motivation or potential for further service and is strongly recommended that this command administratively discharge her due to drug abuse in accordance with paragraph 6210.5 of the reference.  

870817:	Medical Officer's evaluation found applicant not drug dependent.
 
870818:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

870821:	GCMCA [Commanding General, I MAF] 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 870911 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).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.  The following is provided after consideration of the applicant’s attached letter.

The Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified her for enlistment.  While she may feel that her youth and pregnancy were factors that contributed to her actions, the record clearly reflects her willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that she was unfit for further service. On 870807, the applicant was advised of her rights and having elected to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for her conduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions. The applicant used illegal drugs. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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.  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.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of her not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to her discharge.  She is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210 MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16C), Change 4, effective 29 Jul 87 until 26 Jun 89.

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 “afls10.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