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

 
ex-Cpl, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00203

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20031104.  The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  Additionally, the Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region. The Applicant did not list a representative on his DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.  

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040628.  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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct-Drug abuse (with administrative discharge board), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated in his letter attached to the application:

Issue 1:  “Naval Council of Personnel Boards:

I write this letter to the Naval Council of Personnel Boards with great concern for my future.  Recently I applied for a position as an Environmental Engineer with the Indian Health Service (IHS) as a Commission Corps Officer of the U.S. Public Health Service.  I have completed the necessary physical and application process for this position, and have been found qualified in all respects, except for the characterization of my discharge from the Marine Corps.  I received a discharge of General, Under Honorable Conditions” in May 1994.  At this time, I am requesting that the Naval Council of Personnel Boards re-characterize my discharge as “Honorable”.  My reasons for requesting the previous action are outlined in the following paragraphs.

By the board taking the requested action it will allow U.S. Public Health Service to employ me as a Commissioned Corps Officer.  I enjoy the career field I have chosen and I am committed to helping the people IHS serves.  I have always gone out of my way to help people and have worked hard to be successful in life.  I am asking the Naval Council to please confer the action I am requesting.  This action would afford my fiancé and myself the opportunity to move to a new town, buy a home and have a quality future.

I have included documentation from my Service Record Book (SRB) pertaining to military achievements and my “General” discharge.  What will not appear in my SRB and I feel should be considered, are the personal struggles I was facing at the time the incident leading to my “General” discharge had occurred.  At the time, my ex-wife and I had separated and she had moved just three doors down within the same apartment complex.  Seeing her bring other people home affected my frame of mind.  My “General” discharge has haunted me everyday of my life and I only wish to put it behind me.  I love the Marine Corps and everything it stands for, but I feel I have been punished sufficiently over the past 10 years by being denied an honorable discharge.  This incident happened when I was 25 years old.  It was an isolated incident and did not affect my performance throughout my military career, nor did it hinder my performance after being discharged.  This incident did not reflect my character and true dedication to the Marine Corps.  This was one incident in eight years of service with no other adverse action.  One of the character references included is from my Staff NCOIC during the time at which the incident had occurred.

Throughout my eight years in the Marine Corps I received various awards and citations for outstanding performance of duty.  Awards included a Navy Achievement Medal, Certificate of Commendation and a Letter of Appreciation.  I also received several medals and ribbons for participation in Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm such as a National Defense Service Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal (Kuwait), Southwest Asia Service Medal (Saudi Arabia), Kuwait Liberation Medal, Navy Unit Commendation, and a Combat Action Ribbon.  Other medals and ribbons received while being in the service include a Sea Service Deployment ribbon (1 star) and a Good Conduct Medal (1 star).

I was a 5th award expert with the M-16 and an expert with the pistol.  Holding myself to a high physical standard I have numerous awards for superior PFT’s and uniform inspections.  I was a field radio operator, a marksmanship instructor and went through the Naval E.O.D. School.  I also completed a number of MCI courses.

My past and present performance, achievements, and work ethics far outweigh this incident.  I have volunteered my time helping the disabled, working at women’s shelters and serving as a home for rescued dogs.  I have worked as a Firefighter/EMT.  I earned an Associates Degree and a Bachelor Degree in Civil Engineering and I am a certified Engineer-In-Training.  I plan on taking the Professional Engineer exam next October and I am currently pursuing my Masters Degree.  I am a member of the Society of American Military Engineers and American Society of Civil Engineers.  I am actively involved as a chaperon for the young kids in the youth ministry.

Please review the attached documents, which I feel is adequate justification to have my discharge status changed from “General, Under Honorable Conditions” to “Honorable”.  It is provided to show that this was an isolated incident and to justify the Board’s approval of my request.  Your favorable consideration will provide a major positive impact on the remaining years of my life.  Thank you very much for your time and consideration in this matter.

I can be reached at (telephone number deleted) if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

D_ L_ C_ (Applicant), EIT
Project Engineer”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Congressional Inquiry, dtd October 30, 2003
Character reference, dtd October 21, 2003
Character reference (2 pages), dtd October 21, 2003
Character reference, dtd October 30, 2003
Character reference, dtd October 31, 2003
Character reference, dtd October 27, 2003
Character reference, dtd October 30, 2003
Character reference, dtd October 31, 2003
Character reference, undated
Character reference, dtd October 30, 2003
Character reference, dtd March 15, 1999
Character reference, dtd August 18, 1995
Character reference, dtd 15 Dec 94
Letter of Recognition, dtd July 27, 2000
Enlistment Contract (Reserves), dtd 86 Mar 05
Enlistment Contract (Active), dtd 87 Oct 04
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (completion of required active service USMCR IADT)
Enlistment Contract (Active - Reenlistment), dtd 91 May 13
NAVMC 796
NAVMC 11060 (Separation/Enlistment Voucher)
NAVMC 118(3) (Chronological Record) (2 pages)
NAVMC 118(11) (Administrative Remarks) (3 pages)
Report of the (Administrative Separation) Board, undated
NAVMC 118(12) (Offenses and Punishments)
Staff Judge Advocate’s Review (2 pages), dtd 03 May 1994
Record of Proceedings (7 pages), dtd 5 April 94
NAVMC 118(9) (Combat History – Expeditions – Awards Record) (2 pages)
NAVMC 118(6) (Weapons Firing Record, Competitive Marksmanship)
NAVMC 118(8a) (Military and Civilian Occupational Specialties, Education Courses, 
   Technical Training and Tests completed) (2 pages)
Fitness Report (TR, 920501 – 920622)
NAM Certificate
NAM Citation
Honorable Discharge Certificate, dtd 12th May 1991
Certificate of Reenlistment, dtd 13th May 1991
Meritorious Mast Certificate
Good Conduct Certificate (1st Award)
Good Conduct Certificate (2nd Award)
Completion Certificate (Field Radio Operator Course)
Completion Certificate (Explosive Ordnance Disposal Assistant)
Completion Certificate (Marksmanship Instruction Course 1-93)
Completion Certificate (Landing Force Communication Equipment 
   Waterproofing/Weatherproofing)
Promotion Certificate (PFC)
Promotion Certificate (LCpl)
Promotion Certificate (Cpl)
Promotion Certificate (Sgt)
PFT Certificate, dtd 25 January 1989
PFT Certificate, dtd 25 July 1988
PFT Certificate, dtd 25 Jan 1989
PFT Certificate, dtd 1 Nov 1989
MCI Completion Certificate (The Marine NCO)
MCI Completion Certificate (Communications for the FMF Marine)
MCI Completion Certificate (Terrorism Counteraction for Marines)
MCI Completion Certificate (Basic Nutrition)
MCI Completion Certificate (Reconnaissance Marine)
Certificate of Appreciation
BS in CE from California State University, Sacramento
Membership Certificate (The Society of American Military Engineers)
Certificate of Engineer-In-Training
Certificate of Completion (EMT-1)
EMT-1 License
Certificate of Completion (Microfiltration Operator Training Course)
Certificate of Training (PCF/Reserve Basic Fire Control)
AS in GS from Cuesta College
Certificate of Participation (Martial Arts Demonstration)
Applicant’s DD Form 215
Certificate of Achievement (Dean’s Honor Roll)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USMC		860818 - 870303	HON (USMCR IADT)
					871004 - 910512	HON
	Inactive: USMCR (J)		860305 - 871003	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910513		Date of Discharge:  930527

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  00  14
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  53

Highest Rank:  Sgt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation:  Fitness Reports were made available for the Board’s review.

Military Decorations:  MeritM, GCM (w/1star), CertCom, NAM, CAR

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR (w/1 star), NDSM, KLM, SASM (w2/ stars), NUC

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct-Drug abuse (with administrative discharge board), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.5.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

870610:	Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

940113:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:  ON 1943, 27 October 1993, at the U. S./Mexico Border, wrongfully possess 4 syringes of Nandrolone Decanoate, a controlled substance.
Awd red to E-4, forf of $540.00 per month for 2 months and 45 days restriction and extra duties.  Forf susp for 6 mos.  Not appealed.

940117:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct for possession of a controlled substance.

940120:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

940207:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  The factual basis for this recommendation was the Applicant’s “arrest on 27 October 1993 at the United States/Mexico border for possession of a controlled substance, Nandrolone Decanoate.

940330:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge “general - under honorable conditions.”

940503:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

940506:	GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruit Depot/Western Recruiting Region] directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940527 under honorable conditions (general) 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:  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities as requested in the Applicant’s letter to the Board.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board discovered no impropriety or inequity; thereby, considering his discharge proper and equitable.   Relief denied.    

The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “8 years.”  Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  This is especially true when considering the special trust and confidence placed in those who have been entrusted with leading and setting the example for our junior enlisted Marines.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for possession of a controlled substance (Nandrolone Decanoate), thereby, substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated.  The Administrative Discharge Board’s Record of Proceedings clearly documents the Applicant’s misconduct due to possession of illegal drugs as the reason he was discharged.  No other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board discovered no impropriety or inequity and considers his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

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.  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.  After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that his discharge was appropriate and that his evidence of post-service conduct was impressive but did not to mitigate the conduct for which he was discharged.  Relief denied.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  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 P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95. 

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