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

  ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01284

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030723.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized.  The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20040430.  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.  I believe my discharge was inequitable because of the fact of my age at the time, and the life I was leading at that time. I would like to let it be known that those times have changed. It has been five years since my discharge from the Marine Corps. In that time I have been working and as of 2001 I am currently enrolled in Seminole Community College going for a Bachelors in Physical Education. I have been attending the University Church of the Nazarene throughout this time as well.  The reason for my discharge was Misconduct-Drug Abuse. This is due to the fact of my immaturity at the time. Since the discharge, I have not used any form of drugs. Nor do I ever plan on using them again. The Marine Corps is my dream. I come from a family made up of military members. I am ashamed for what I have done and also ashamed for what I did to my family. I would like this discharge to be upgraded to one that meets the standards to allow me to rejoin the Marines or any other branch. I understand policies and regulations concerning the Drug Abuse discharge.  I am requesting an exception.
Attached are three letters of recommendation.  I sincerely hope you read over them and come to the understanding that my discharge at that time was one that pertains to someone in the past. I am no longer nineteen. I am now twenty-four and wanting to be a United States Marine again. I would like to pursue my dream and any help will be greatly appreciated.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Letter of recommendation from Cdr. D_ P_, USN (Ret.)
Letter of recommendation from M_ B_
Letter of recommendation from Rev. R_ L_
Unofficial transcript from Seminole Community College

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		961213 - 970721	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970722		Date of Discharge:  980227

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  06
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  73

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  2.9 (2)			Conduct:  2.9 (2)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

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:

961211:	Initial enlistment contract documents admission of pre-service marijuana experimentation.  Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

971219:	NAVDRUGLAB [San Diego, CA], reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 971205, tested positive for Amphetamine/Methamphetamine.

971231:	Counseled regarding deficiencies, specifically, the illegal use of methamphetamine.  Necessary corrective actions explained.  Sources of assistance identified.  Disciplinary and administrative discharge warnings issued.

971231:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:  Tested positive for Meth/Amphetamines on 971202.
Awarded forfeiture of $450.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days.  Not appealed.

980105:	Applicant refused medical evaluation for drug abuse.  

980126:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by willful use of illicit drugs.

980126:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

980126:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  The factual basis for this recommendation was a positive urinalysis for Meth/Amphetamine.

980130:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

980130:	GCMCA [CG, MCB, CAMPEN] 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 19980227 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.  Relief denied.

The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any of the armed forces, and the reenlistment policies are promulgated by the individual service secretaries.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief, is therefore, 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, 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