Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901365
Original file (MD0901365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090421
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)       20020423 - 20020513     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020514     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20040414      H ighest Rank :
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20040218 :       Article 86 (UA - from Aloha run )
         Article 107 (False official statement)
         Article 112a (Drugs - steroids)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20030219 :       For illegal drug use /s teroids, making a false statement, and unauthorized absence.














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 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       Mitigating circumstances due to recent death of brother.
2. Seeks r eenlistment .
3. Wishes to improve employment opportunities.
4. Youth and immaturity
were factors in separation.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 1217            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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

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 g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Mil itary Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence, 1 specification), Article 107 (False official statement, 1 specification ), and Arti cle 112a (Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance /steroids , 1 specification ); The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, and acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 20020412 . Based on the Article 112a offense committed by the Applicant , processing for administ rative separation was mandatory. When notified for a dministrative s eparation p rocessing, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified coun sel, submit a written statement and request an a dministrative b oard .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that he was emotionally distraught over the death of his brother and made poor decisions as a result, mitigating his misconduct. The NDRB recognizes that the death of a family member is a tragic and traumatic event. However, the Applicant provide d no documentation, nor was evidence found in his service or medical records indicating that he informed his chain of command of his family problems and did not receive the assistance, leave or help he asked for. Additionally, the Applicant makes no mention of, nor provides documented proof that he attempted to use any one of the numerous family supp ort programs sponsored by the military for its service members. These programs and services, such as Family Advocacy, Navy–Marine Corps Relief Society, Red Cross, the Chaplain ’s Office and Navy medical health personnel all provide services to members of the military, regardless of grade, in times of need. While tragic, family problems —to include the death of a family member —do not mitigate the use of illegal drugs.

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 processing for administrative separation regardless of grade or time in service. This 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. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant would like to be eligible to reenlist in the armed services. 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant w ishes to improve his opportunities for employment. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant states that at the time of his misconduct , he was young and had no one to talk to about his problems. He contends that his youth and immat urity contributed to making a poor choice to use steroids and mitigates his subsequent misconduct. While t he Applicant may believe that his misconduct was due to making a youthful mistake, the NDRB determined that the Applicant was responsible and should be held accountable for his actions . Furth er, the record reflects willful misconduct , that the Applicant was responsible for his behavior at the time of the offenses and had no potential for further service. The NDRB determined th at the Applicant's youth and immaturity was not a mitigating facto r in his misconduct .

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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .



ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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 Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.

Employment/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 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (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; attendance at 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 reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 | MD0800381

    Original file (MD0800381.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20030920 - 20031109 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20031110Period of enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge: 20060420Length of Service: 02 Yrs 04Mths17 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:19AFQT: 33MOS: 3531Highest Rank: LCPLProficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 3.7 / 3.3 Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):SSDR, NDSM, GWOTEM,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001805

    Original file (ND1001805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801886

    Original file (ND0801886.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20050916 - 20051114Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20051115Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20071128Highest Rank/Rate:NFIRLength of Service: Years Months14 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 52EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214): CAR ICMPeriods of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901356

    Original file (MD0901356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of 3-0, an administrative discharge board found that the Applicant had committed misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation and that the Applicant’s discharge characterization should be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The record reflects that the Applicant’s administrative separation board was conducted in accordance with Marine Corps’ policies and standards.The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service in order...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900676

    Original file (MD0900676.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because his only misconduct was an isolated use of steroids which was known to the command only because of the Applicant’s admission. The NDRB determined a discharge upgrade based on these Issues,which were already considered by his Administrative Separation Board and his chain of command up to and including the Division Commander, would be inappropriate.After a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300098

    Original file (MD1300098.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. : (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to reenlist.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500730

    Original file (MD1500730.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801724

    Original file (ND0801724.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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.The Applicant submitted a statement with his DD-293 Application showing participation in a 12-step substance abuse treatment program and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201033

    Original file (ND1201033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801421

    Original file (MD0801421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - Bipolar Disorder information - Picture of former service member - Picture of former service member and family DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.Request upgrade based on mitigating circumstances. While the Board does not dispute the family’s effort in attempting to make the Marine Corps aware of their son’s past, the Board has to accept the fact the official enlistment application does not contain any of the...