Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900848
Original file (MD0900848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090227
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)       20060303 - 20060519     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20060512     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20061220      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 72
MOS: 0612
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): 3.6 ( NFIR ) / 3.6 (NFIR)      Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF : 20061016-20061213 (59 Days)

NJP:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:


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 :



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Reenlistment o pportunities .
2. Employment o pportunities .
3. Isolated incident.
 4. Post-service conduct.
Decision


 Date: 20 0 9 0528            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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

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 , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct in the Marine Corps was an isolated incident . 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 eviden ce submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by one charge for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 112a (Wrongful use of a controlled substance: cocaine). In addition, the Applicant required a pre-service drug waiver to enlist in the Marine Corps and signed the Statement of Understanding, Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 1 March 2006. The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the service to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. 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 but opted instead for an administrative discharge.

On 8 November 2006, the Applicant requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial. In the r equest the Applicant noted his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he was guilty of the offense. He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that charac terization of service could be Under O ther T han Honorable C onditions. 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. The Board determined the awarded characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.
Issue 4: ( ) . The Applicant acknowledges his mistake and claims he is a “hard working employee for Applebees.” 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. Docum entation 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; attending or completion of higher education (official transcripts) 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 rev iewed 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 ’ s statement o n the DD Form 293, he provide d two character references , one from his e mployer and the other from his f ather as evidence on his behalf. While t he Board applauds the Applicant in his efforts to get back on the right track, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient enough to warrant an upgrade of his discharge characterization. T o 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 characteriz ation of service received, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions , was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violation involved , and based on the limited post- service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.

Should the Applicant obt ain additional evidence or post- service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. There a re veteran's organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

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 112a (Wrongful use of a 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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB ’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 NDRB 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 NDRB 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0800765

    Original file (MD0800765.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and based on the limited post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900680

    Original file (MD0900680.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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 Representation: From Congress member: Other Documentation: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900732

    Original file (MD0900732.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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902223

    Original file (ND0902223.rtf) Auto-classification: 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.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 eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900850

    Original file (MD0900850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined the characterization of service received, Bad Conduct Discharge, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and without any post-service documentation clemency would be inappropriateAfter a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901390

    Original file (ND0901390.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, General (Under Honorable Conditions), was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and without any post-service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 Pertinent...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801523

    Original file (MD0801523.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any additional statements and evidence of post service accomplishments. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901377

    Original file (ND0901377.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900517

    Original file (ND0900517.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the offense involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.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:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801879

    Original file (ND0801879.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Should the Applicant feel at some later time his post-service conduct is worthy of personally presenting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, etc.,willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.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...