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

   ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00962

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030508.  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 20040401.  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.  “You’ve probably heard, read, and seen every excuse possible.  I have no excuse for what I did.  I was of sound mind and keen of the U.C.M.J. regulations and guidelines at the exact moment of my misconduct.

I’m simply submitting this request to upgrade my discharge from O.T.H. to at least a general discharge in order to obtain employment – this has not been possible due to disclosure of my DD 214 form during a background investigation pryor to employment.

-Thank you for your consideration and understanding

D_ F_ M_ (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		990730 - 990920	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990921		Date of Discharge:  020222

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  05  02
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  29			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10 GED		AFQT:  67

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

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

Military Decorations:  None

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

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:

990629:	Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

000822:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to maintain the high standards expected of a military policeman by my excessive consumption of alcohol in the barracks and my failure to maintain my assigned quarters in an adequate state of cleanliness.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

011129:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [On 010921 I did on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton on or about 2045, willfully violate a lawful general order, paragraph 2504 (2) Base Order P5000.2J dated 990504 by allowing LCpl M_ to wrongfully operate my privately owned motorcycle while on the base.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

020107:	NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 011228, tested positive for cocaine.

020131:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A:
Specification: Used a scheduled II controlled substance between 011222 and 011223, to wit: cocaine.
Awarded forfeiture of $619.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to PFC.  Not appealed.

020201:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

020201:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not 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.

020204:	Applicant refused evaluation for drug dependency by a Medical Officer.  

020207:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  The factual basis for this recommendation is that on or about 011222 to 011223, Lance Corporal M_ (Applicant) was at the pier on the coast highway, Oceanside, CA, Lance Corporal M_ (Applicant) knowingly and willingly used a scheduled II controlled substance, to wit: cocaine.  On or about 020108, Lance Corporal M_ (Applicant) test positive for cocaine on a urinalysis test.  

020215:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

020215:	GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton] 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 20020222 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.  Drug abuse warranted processing for separation.  Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

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, to enhance employment opportunities, or for 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