Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900199
Original file (MD0900199.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081031
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     20010413 - 20010916     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010917     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050127      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 11 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 43
MOS: 3381
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (KUWAIT)

Periods of UA / CONF : UA: 20040711-20040715 ( 5 days) [Extracted from DD Form 214, Block 29]
CONF: Listed below

NJP:
- 20040608 :       Article 112a (Drug use, wrongful use of controlled substance, marijuana)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20040813 :      Article 92 (Breaking restriction)
         Article 134 (Dri ving off base while on restriction, while driving license was suspended was pulled over by Jacksonville Police)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:
- 20041123 :       Article 112a (Drug use, possession and wrongful use of controlled substance, marijuana), 2 specifications
          Sentence : (20041123-20041216 29 days)
         CA Action (20041123) the action is approved and will be executed

SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20021030 :       For the situation surrounding the night of 20021026. On the night of 20021026 PFC was assigned to the gear watch at Ney Hill sight. SNM was found by Cpl asleep in his car along with a Private around 0200 in the morning. SNM is advised that this behavior will not be condoned or tolerated.

- 20040422 :       For Violation of Article 92. Specifically, on 20040415, you were cited by PMO for operating a vehicle under a base suspension, not having your identification card in possession, and you did not have insurance. Your actions are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:
DD 214:      Service / 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 Congress member :

Other Documentation :

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 .

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 92 (Breaking restriction) ; Article 112a (Drug use ) and Article 134 (Dri ving off base while on restriction, while driving license was suspended was pulled over by Jacksonville Police)



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Employment opportunities.
2. Reenlistment opportunities.
3. Post-service conduct .

Decision

 Date : 20 0 9 0217            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , and s regarding .

Issue 3 : ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because he has learned his lesson the hard way . 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’s record of service was marred by two retention warnings, two NJP ’s , and one SCM for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Breaking restriction) ; Article 112a (Drug use, possession, wrongful use of a controlled substance, marijuana) , 3 specifications; Article 134 (Dri ving off base while on restriction, while driving license was suspended was pulled over by Jacksonville Police) . The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service , grade or record of service . Violations of this policy result in, at a minimum, mandatory processing for an administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge in spite of the numerous and frequent violations of UCMJ Articles but instead opted f or an administrative discharge subsequent to his SCM.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; and documentation of a drug free lifestyle. 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 Applicant DD Form 293, no documentation was provided for review. To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. Should the Applicant feel h is post service conduct becomes substantial enough to

warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.

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 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801229

    Original file (ND0801229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Due to the seriousness of the multiple violations and his length of service and amount of experience in the Navy, the Board determined the award of an “Under Other Than Honorable Condition” discharge was appropriate and an upgrade or change would be inappropriateAfter 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700303

    Original file (MD0700303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of three retention warnings and one nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substance). Discharge Process Date Notified: 20050801Basis for Discharge: DUE TO: Least Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800032

    Original file (MD0800032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of Service2. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801395

    Original file (ND0801395.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and without having the necessary post service documentation to review an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800256

    Original file (MD0800256.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined that the absence of any documentation provided by the Applicant could be used mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801604

    Original file (ND0801604.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 submitted a statement with his DD-293 Application claiming employment, education efforts, and participation in his church and in other community service. The Board determined the characterization...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400455

    Original file (MD1400455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 March 2012, an Administrative Separation Board determined by unanimous vote that a preponderance of evidence supported the Applicant’s misconduct, that the Applicant should be administratively separated from the Marine Corps, and that the separation should be characterized as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900230

    Original file (MD0900230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee clemency will be granted, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct justifies clemency.The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900597

    Original file (MD0900597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service, grade or 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700404

    Original file (ND0700404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the record that the Separation Authority failed to consider all relevant factors, including the Applicant’s overall service, in determining that an under than honorable conditions discharge was warranted. 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. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of...