Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700715
Original file (MD0700715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-, USMC
MD07-00715
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070724   Characterization Received: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlistment opportunities
                           2. Administrative Separation Board was not in compliance with MCO P1900.16E
                           3. Circumstances of administrative separation were fundamentally unjust.

Decision

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

Date: 20 071205             Location: Washington D.C.         Representation :

Discussion

 Issue 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: ( ). The Applicant implies that the Administrative Board was not in compliance with MCO P1900.16E as he was permitted only two witnesses at his administrative board. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was permitted only two witnesses and therefore the Administrative Board was not in compliance of MCO P1900.16E. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue 3: ( ). The Applicant contends that the circumstances of administrative separation were fundamentally unjust. The Board found that the Commanding Officer recommended that the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps as a result of his conviction at special courts-martial and that all attempts to correct the Applicant’s personal behavior had failed. The Applicant should understand that there are three possible outcomes in processing for separation ; discharge, retention, and suspension. The Applicant exercised all rights afforded to him throughout the process. The Administrative Board unanimously voted to separate the Applicant and not suspend his separation. The Commander of Marine Corps Base, Quantico directed separation of the Applicant with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The Board determined that an upgrade to honorable would not be appropriate.

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. 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)     20010412 - 20010706              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010707      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20040226
Length of Service : 2 Yrs 7 Mths 20 D ys    Lost Time : 75 Days UA: Days Confine d : 75
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT:        MOS: 9812 Highest Rank:
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      4.5 ( 4 ) / 4.4 ( 4 )     Fitness reports :
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle , Navy Unit Commendation, National Defense Service Medal, Letter of Appreciation (2)

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

 20030401 :         NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 20030328 , tested positive for ( Ecstasy ).
20030805 :        S P CM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 107 – False Official Statement, Art 112a – Wrongful use of ecstasy .
          Awarded - FOP ( $700.00 amount) for ( 3 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Confinement ( 105 days). All confinement in excess of 90 days will be suspended for a period of 12 months.

20031020:        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for false official statemen t and controlled substance use .

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   20031020
Basis for Discharge:      DUE TO:
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20031020
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      

Administrative Board Date :       20040120
Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:     BY DUE TO .
        
         BY SEPARATION WARRANTED.
Recommendation on Separation:   BY SHOULD NOT BE SUSPENDED
Recommendation on Characterization:     BY

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20031021 )
SJA review (date):      
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, MCB QUANTICO ( 20040212 )
Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO:
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20040226



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
01 Sep 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article s 107 ( False official statement) and 134 (Wrongful use of controlled substance).

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

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901317

    Original file (MD0901317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE.Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901037

    Original file (MD0901037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Without corroboratory documentary evidence, the Board cannot provide relief based on Applicant’s post-service conduct.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 remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700062

    Original file (ND0700062.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post ServiceIssue 1.The Board determined that this Issue is not an issue which can form the basis for relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:20031020Reason for Discharge - Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20031020Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of DocumentsSubmit...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900937

    Original file (MD0900937.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant noted that VA records reflected his discharge as Honorable, which was different from his DD214. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. If a former member has been...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700429

    Original file (MD0700429.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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20010220 - 20010415 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010116Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20040226Length of Service: 02 Yrs 09Mths17 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: 24Education...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501274

    Original file (MD0501274.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00974

    Original file (MD02-00974.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    010810: Commanding Officer, Support Battalion, recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to illegal use of drugs. 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 Applicant contends that, as a matter of equity, his drug use was the only incident in an otherwise honorable period of 61 months of service. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801160

    Original file (MD0801160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301101

    Original file (MD1301101.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MDD13-01101 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT APPLICANT’S ISSUES 1. The Applicant was convicted at a Special Court-Martial and was separated from the Marine Corps with a Bad Conduct Discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001849

    Original file (MD1001849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.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...