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

 
ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00261

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20031125.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closet to Houston, TX.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearing are held in the Washington, DC area.  The NDRB also advised that the board first conduct a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040720.  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.  “To whom it may concern
I write to you today with a plead for a change in my discharge.  I now understand that my conduct was unbecoming and not tolerated.  I had made my mistake that change my whole life, so early in my life.  I ask for forgiveness.  I spent all four years in the Marine Corps being an overall good Marine.  Good PFT, good Pros & Cons, letters of appreciation, meritorious mast, and Good Conduct Medal.   Just my misconduct two weeks before my discharge change it all.  I guess I could say I was young and stupid, but besides that being the fact.  It just not good enough.  Well today I live an O.K. live can’t complain.  I have a beautiful wife with two children.  Chris is 16 years old and might have a good career in the Navy.  Well I ask of you to change my discharge not just for me but so I can also be part of Chris military experience I would really want the satisfaction sharing the moment with him and say that I truly lived the life and gave it all

Thank you”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		920724 - 930426	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  930427		Date of Discharge:  970425

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  11  29
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  36

Highest Rank:  Cpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.3 (10)			Conduct:  4.3 (10)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, LoA, MM (2), GCM

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:

920723:	Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

940422:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to follow proper procedures while operating a government vehicle.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

970207:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failing to report at 0600, 970202 for “C” inspection.
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00.  Not appealed.

970207:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failing to report at the time prescribed for “C” inspection.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

970228:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go to appointed place of duty at 0730, 970207 as an instructor.
Awarded forfeiture of $400.00 and 14 days restriction.  Not appealed.

970228:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to go to appointed place of duty as an instructor.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

970317:	NAVDRUGLAB [Jacksonville, FL], reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 970225, tested positive for THC.

970402:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongfully used marijuana.
Awarded forfeiture of $500.00 per month for 2 months (one month suspended for 6 months) and reduction to LCpl.  Not appealed.

970416:	SACO/DACO evaluation found the Applicant to be a drug abuser.

970416:	Applicant declined VA treatment for substance abuse.

970417:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by wrongful use of marijuana.

970417:	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.

970417:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  

970424:	GCMCA [CG, MCB, CLNC] 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 19970425 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 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 31 August 2001. 

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