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

 ex-Pvt, USMC 
Docket No. MD03-00536

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030211.  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 20031229.  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:

1.  “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 43 months of service with no other adverse action.”

Documentation

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

Statement from Master Sergeant H_, immediate supervisor, dated June 26, 1997
Statement from Sergeant L_, immediate supervisor, dated June 26, 1997
Statement from Staff Sergeant G_, immediate supervisor, undated
Statement from Staff Sergeant B_, immediate supervisor, undated
Statement from immediate supervisor V_ R_, dated December 16, 1998
Statement of Commanding Officer LtCol H_, dated March 14, 2000
Statement of W_ E_ J_, Bishop, dated March 15, 2000
Statement from immediate supervisor L_ T_, Logistics Manager, JWK International, dated October 16, 2000
Certification of Ordination (Eldership), dated March 4, 2001
Statement of co-worker N_ R_, dated December 19, 2002
Personal statement to the Board, undated
Seventy-eight pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		940110 - 940117	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940118		Date of Discharge:  970821

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  07  04
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  14			AFQT:  59

Highest Rank:  Cpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.7 (7)			Conduct:  4.5 (7)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, MM, Certificate of Commendation

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:

940109:	Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

970425:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Bad judgment due to admitted drug use.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided.  Applicant refused to acknowledge this entry.

970515:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Assignment of conduct mark of 3.0 effective 970131 due to exercising poor judgment.]  Applicant refused to acknowledge this entry.

970522:	Applicant to confinement.

970528:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A:
	Specification: Wrongfully use marijuana on approximately 15 occasions between the Summer of 1995 and April 1996.
	Finding: to Charge I and the specification thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: Confinement for 15 days, reduction to Pvt.
	CA action 970528:  Sentence approved and ordered executed.

970615:	Applicant from confinement.

970820:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

970820:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

Partial discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970821 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).

Issue 1.  There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs.  Even one instance of drug abuse warranted processing for separation.  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. Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  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.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity is evident 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.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his 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 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