Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701257
Original file (MD0701257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PFC, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070913
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: -DRUG ABUSE
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN (drug abuse)

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19921204 - 19921208            
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19921209               Period of enlistment : Years Months             Date of Discharge: 19940520
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 05 M ths   12 D ys          Education Level:         Age at Enlistment: 20     AFQT: 86
MOS: 0200        Highest Rank: LCPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      4.5 (3) / 4.5 (3)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, Rifle SS

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJPs :     1
         19940323 : Art 112a (Drug use)     Awarded – RIR, FOP, RESTR, EPD   Susp – RESTR, EPD
        
6105 Counseling :
              

Types of Documents Submitted

 Related 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 Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)

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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Reenlistment opportunities.
2. Youth and immaturity.
3. Record of service.
4. Post service.

Decision

Date: 20 08 0509 Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT-DRUG ABUSE .
Discussion

 : 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 , specifically the paragraph concerning Reenlistment/RE-codes.

Issue s 2 and 3 (Equity). The Applicant contends his problems were attributed to his immaturity at the time and presents his record of service as justification for an upgrade.

The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. During Board reviews the government is presumed to conduct its affairs with regularity unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.

There is credible evidence in the record the Applicant used illegal drugs. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for h is c onduct or that he should not be held accountable for h is actions. While the Applicant may feel immaturity was the un derlying cause of misconduct the standards of Naval discipline and tolerance for drug use is made extremely clear from the beginning of any member’s career.

When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A n “U nder O ther T han H onorable ” conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. C ertain serious offenses even though isolated, warrant separation from Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline regardless of grade or quality of previous service provided . The Applicant’s service was marred one no n - judicial punishment for a violation of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice, Article 112a . A v iolation of Article 112a is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. The Board determined a n upgrade w ould be inappropriate and is not warranted .
Issue 4 (Equity). The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian sector subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered. The Applicant provided no documentation, other than his own statement, of post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, educational pursuits, evidence of a drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined the post service statement provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct result ing in the characterization of discharge.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

Pertinent Regulation/Law

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 5420.174D 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 112a.


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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301098

    Original file (MD1301098.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD13-010938 NN .ex-Pvt, USMC CURRENT DISCHARGE AND APPLICANT’S REQUEST Application Received: 20130416 Characterization of Service Received: (per DD 214) UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS Narrative Reason for Discharge: (per DD 214) MISCONDUCT Authority for Discharge: (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5 [DRUGS} Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service: : Inactive: USMCR...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300952

    Original file (MD1300952.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD13-00952 ey ex-Pvt, USMC CURRENT DISCHARGE AND APPLICANT’S REQUEST Application Received: 20130319 Characterization of Service Received: (corrected) UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS Narrative Reason for Discharge: (per DD 214) MISCONDUCT Authority for Discharge: (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5 [DRUGS] Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: HONORABLE OR GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002184

    Original file (ND1002184.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant wants discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military.2. : (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801152

    Original file (MD0801152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There was no evidence in the record, nor was any submitted by the Applicant, documenting he was not responsible for his actions or that the misconduct should be excused based on youth and immaturity. Again, the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301195

    Original file (ND1301195.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND13-01195 ee Docket No, NDIS-01195 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD {NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT APPLICANT’S ISSUES 1. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards law.af mil.” : 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100960

    Original file (ND1100960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 remain . ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800526

    Original file (MD0800526.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : 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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700680

    Original file (MD0700680.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the command unfairly singled him out for discipline or did not follow Marine Corps regulations during the separation processing. 20040129 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20040123)SJA review (date): (20040316)Separation Authority...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100664

    Original file (ND1100664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he served four years of his five-year contract honorably.2. By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701258

    Original file (MD0701258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.