Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700330
Original file (MD0700330.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-, USMC
MD07-00330
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070119 Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT                                         Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to: or GENERAL or UNCHARACTERIZED
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Change RE-Code, desire to re-enlist
                           2. Isolated incident
                           3. Post-service conduct

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .

Date: 20 071011                    Location: Washington D.C.

Discussion

Issue(s) 1: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2 ( ). Despite a servicemember’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. The Applicant’s service record is marred by a summary court-martial for illegal drug use, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. Mandatory processing for separation is required for Marines who abuse illegal drugs. 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. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considers his discharge proper and equitable.

Issue 3 ( ). 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that could be provided to the Board to corroborate claims of good post-service conduct include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board noted that, based on the date stamped on the notification of administrative separation, the Applicant appears to have responded to the notification before actually being notified. In its review, the Board determined that the date discrepancy was clerical error by which the Applicant was not prejudiced and therefore was not grounds for relief. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries , Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found that

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     20000828 - 20010107              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010108               Years Contracted :                 Date of Discharge: 20030828
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 07 Mths 21 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d : 24
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:      AFQT: 32          MOS: 3531
Highest Rank:    Proficiency/Conduct marks: 3.9 / 3.7 (# of occasions not found in record)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION, RIFLE EXPERT BADGE, PISTOL EXPERT BADGE

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 20021024 :         NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 20021018 , tested positive for amphetamine/ methamphetamine.

20021029:        Applicant refused treatment for substance abuse.

20030715:        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 112a (2 specs) - Wrongful use of methamphetamne and amphetamine.
         Awarded - FOP ( $767.00) for ( 1 month); RIR ( E-1 ); Confinement ( 30 d ays). CA Action: 20030716

20030811:        Applicant refused treatment through military and requested to go through VA Medical Center at discharge. Applicant acknowledged VA treatment center location.

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   20030811 (date stamped)
Basis for Discharge:      DUE TO:
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20030808 (handwritten, date stamped 20030811)
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 2003081 5 )
SJA review (date):       ( 20030819 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, 2D FORCE SERVICE SUPPORT GROUP ( 20030820 )
 Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO:
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20030828

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:             Other Documentation (Describe)

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F ) , effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT .

 B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000 . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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.
Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD . ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.

Board Membership: 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:

 Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
 Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900460

    Original file (ND0900460.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he provided several character references as evidence on his behalf. After a thorough...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700881

    Original file (MD0700881.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.The Applicant’s service was marred by one nonjudicial punishment for a violation of UCMJ Article 112a (Wrongful use of a controlled substance). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700310

    Original file (ND0700310.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. If...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900058

    Original file (ND0900058.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700756

    Original file (ND0700756.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service was marred by one retention warning, two NJPs and two Summary Court-Martials (SCM) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 87 (Missing movement),Article 90 (Willfully disobeying a commissioned officer), Article 92 (Dereliction of duty), Article 107 (False official statement), Article 134 (Drunkenness, Incapacitated for duty), and Article 134 (Breaking restriction). The Applicant contends that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801221

    Original file (ND0801221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined an upgrade or change would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700037

    Original file (MD0700037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Had misconduct as a basis for discharge been found to be supported by the evidence, regulations provide that it would be the appropriate basis even when a personality disorder exists. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101515

    Original file (MD1101515.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801298

    Original file (MD0801298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency.However, the Applicant submitted no verifiable documents as mentioned in the above paragraph for the Board to consider in a clemency review. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Court-Martial proceedings, Discharge Process, Post Service Conduct and Accomplishments,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000063

    Original file (ND1000063.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...