Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901904

Original file (MD0901904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090702

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)       20040909 - 20040912     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040913     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050622      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 9 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
MOS: 3300
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

NJP:

- 20050124 :       Article (Unauthorized absence, 2 days, surrendered).
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20050420 :       Article (Wrongful use, possession etc of a controlled substance)
         Specification 1: Positive urinalysis for cocaine, 323 ng/ml
         Specification 2: Positive urinalyses for marijuana 27 ng/ml
         Awarded : Susp ended:

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. Undiagnosed Bi-Polar condition mitigates misconduct.
2. Applicant desires to become eligible for VA benefits.
3. Applicant requests reimbursement of any funds withheld.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0409 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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 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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence , : 2 days, surrendered ), Article (Wrongful use, possession etc of a controlled substance , : cocaine, 323 ng/ml and marijuana, 27 ng/ml). The DoD concentration cut offs for the purposes of positive urinalysis results are 100 ng/ml for cocaine and 15 ng/ml for marijuana. The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 8 Sept 2004 . Based on the Article 112a violation , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of a dministrative separation processing , the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was suffering from Bipolar disorder which was undiagnosed and mitigates his misconduct. Pursu ant to Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN) 6203.3, members may be processed for separation based on a mental health professional's clinical diagnosis of a personality disorder when the disorder is so severe that one's ability to function effectively and perform their duties is significantly impaired, and the individual poses a threat to safety or well being of themselves or others. Separation for personality disorder is not appropriate when separation is warranted for any other reason (e. g., member meets minimum criteria for misconduct processing). The record of evidence reflects the Applicant met established requirements for processing by reason o f M isconduct (Drug abuse ).

The Applicant s ubmitted medical documentation substantiating a diagnosis of Bipolar disorder dated 11 Jan 2009. Additionally, he s ubmitted a letter from a civilian psychiatrist dated 11 Feb 2009 stating the Applicant has been under her care since 15 Jan 2009 and , in her clinical opinion , the Applicant is unable to maintain steady employment due to his diagnosis. The Applicant’s symptoms include “inability to focus, lack of impulse control and other associated symptoms.”

Evaluation by a military mental health professional during the Applicant on 21 April 2005 states the Applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in separation proceedings and was mentally responsible for his conduct. The report states the Applicant had been hospitalized on multiple occasions for reporting suicidal ideations and, “The results of extensive psychological testing are characteristic of individuals that are feigning a mental disorder and rarely seen in patients that are responding completely truthfully. ” The report recommended , “ … expeditious administrative separation by reason of drug abuse or by reason of Convenience of the Government due to a mental condition (Adjustment Disorder) not constituting a physical disability….he is a significant risk for hurting himself or others. ” Since the Applicant was found to be mentally responsible for his conduct, NDRB found the Applicant’s mental condition did not mitigate his misconduct. Misconduct was the proper narrative reason for separation because the Applicant met the criteria for misconduct processing. An upgrade would be inappropriate.
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to become eligible for VA 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant requests reimbursement of any funds withheld when he was discharged. The NDRB has no authority to grant relief on the basis of this issue. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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 .

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 .

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 Disable d American 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 their 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201340

Original file (MD1201340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s service and medical records and substantial documentation provided by the Applicant, the NDRB determined his mental condition did not mitigate his extensive and repetitive misconduct. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201821

Original file (ND1201821.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100680

Original file (MD1100680.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief not warranted.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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200498

Original file (MD1200498.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The administrative board voted 3-0 to separate the Applicant 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 NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001152

Original file (MD1001152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined that the discharge action was proper; as such, relief based on propriety is not warranted.Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval Service in order to maintain good order and discipline. The Applicant was re-processed for administrative separation; on 24 February2009,the discharge action was approved - Misconduct (Drug Abuse) - and the Applicant was awarded an Under Other Than...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102142

Original file (MD1102142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined that the evidence of record did establish the basis for discharge and that the Separation Authority actions were proper. ” 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. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100444

Original file (ND1100444.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his undiagnosed Bipolar disorder and mental disability affected his actions and led to his misconduct, and he seeks an upgrade to Honorable and a change to his discharge to reflect medical reasons. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400258

Original file (ND1400258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

However, as a result of the PTSD claim, the NDRB included a psychiatrist on the board.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 evidence submitted by the...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101686

Original file (MD1101686.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 .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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100805

Original file (MD1100805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901904

Similar Decisions