Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801160
Original file (MD0801160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080501
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG USE
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19960624 - 19970615              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19970616               Period of E nlistment : Years Months             Date of Discharge: 19990927
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 12 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 66
MOS: 0313        Highest Rank:                     Fitness R eports:
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle COC

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJPs :    
         19990727 : Art 112a (Wrongfully use methylene dioxyamphetamine, methylene dioxymethamphetamine (Ecstasy) ) .
         Awarded - . Susp - .

6105 Counseling :
         19990927 : For illegal drug involvement, (methamphetamine usage identified through urinalysis confirmed by NAVDRUGLAB JAXFL message 120900Z Oct97).

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 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. Desires to reenlist.
2 . Young and immature.
3 . Isolated incident.

Decision


 Date: 20 08 0711             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

 Issue 1 ( ) : The Applicant asks for an opportunity to reenlist in the Marine Corps in order to serve his country and build a better future for himself and his family. 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 , specifically the paragraph concerning s , regarding .

Issue 2 ( ) : RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant states this incident was a one time mistake in an otherwise flawless 28 month service record. He claims this occurred a long time ago , when he was young , and he has matured since t hen. 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 Applicant contends his youth and immaturity mitigates his misconduct. During the service record review it was noted h is Company Commander , in his separation endorsement , writes that despite numerous command classes explaining the USMC drug policy , in which ecstasy use was highlighted, Pvt Sheridan went to a “rave” party and ingested the drug with total disregard for the consequences. While Pvt Sheridan may feel his immaturity was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further military service . The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions based on youth or immaturity. The Board determined an upgrade was not appropriate.

Issue 3 (Equity): RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident . Despite a service member’s prior record of se rvice, certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Illegal drug use cannot be tolerated by any member of the Marine Crops regardless of grade or time in service. When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that servi ce under honorable conditions. An under other than honorable 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. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by one non - judicial punishment for a violation of the U nifo r m C ode of M ilitary J ustice, Article 112a for drug abuse and one retention warning for illegal drug involvement. Violation of Article 112a is considered a serious offense, punishable by a punitive discharge and up to 5 years imprisonment if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a court marital but opted instead to discharge the Applicant through an Administrative Separation. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of the Naval Service and f alls far short of w hat is required for an upgrade in the characterization of service. The Board determined an upgrade or change 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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective
31 Jan uary 19 97 until 31 August 2001.

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 or is referred to a court-martial fo r 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 other medical related reasons. ” 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500248

    Original file (MD1500248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COURT-MARTIAL. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600528

    Original file (MD0600528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The characterization of service directed was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. 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 writing to:Secretary of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101942

    Original file (ND1101942.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana one time prior to entering the Navy.Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301641

    Original file (MD1301641.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Marine Corps.2. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401427

    Original file (MD1401427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An Administrative Separation Board determined a preponderance of evidenced proved the Applicant’s use of Ecstasy, and recommended the Applicant be administratively separated from the Marine Corps with Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. After a careful review of the Applicant’s service record, and written statements from his chain of command concerning his character of service, the NDRB determined that, although the Applicant’s misconduct cannot be tolerated, his misconduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100849

    Original file (MD1100849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the CO’s administrative separation recommendation to the Commanding General (CG), 1st Combat Logistics Group (CLG), he recommended that the Applicant be administratively separated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service due to Misconduct - Drug Abuse. Based upon the evidence of record, the NDRB found no improprieties or inequities in the Applicant’s discharge processing.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400400

    Original file (ND1400400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .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 presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901242

    Original file (MD0901242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiate or relate directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801917

    Original file (MD0801917.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant is requesting a discharge upgrade, because “I’ve learned from my mistake, and I’m trying to get this weight off my shoulders.” 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. ” Additional Reviews :...