Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000587
Original file (MD1000587.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20091121
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)       19910618 - 19911222     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19911223     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19950329      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 07 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 74
MOS: 3521
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle MM JMUA

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 19920617 :      Article ( General article, underage drinking)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19920617 :       For underage consumption of alcoholic beverages.

- 19941028 :       For my illegal drug involvement; specifically, positive urinalysis test result, NAVDRUGLAB, Naval Hospital San Diego, Lab Accession No. 627479, containing THC.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error s on the original DD Form 214:

 Block 4b, Pay Grade, should read: “E4”

 “ MISCONDUCT ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.



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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation:           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, Misconduct , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D), effective
27 June 1989 until 17 August 1995.

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. The Applicant’s wife contends his discharge is inequitable , because it was based on an isolated incident after three years of honorable service .
 2. The Applicant’s wife contends that you th and immaturity were contributing factors that led to his misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20110303 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

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

The term “Applicant” refers to the service member affected by the discharge regardless of whether the service member is living or deceased and who actually submitted the application. In this case, the Applicant's wife is requesting an upgrade to her husband’s characterization to General, because he is now deceased. Although requests by families to upgrade the characterization of a deceased service member are infrequent, they are not unique. The NDRB reviews these cases as if the Applicant was still living and in an objective manner, but takes into consideration certain documentation that may not be available or reasonable to obtain. 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 Applicant. The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 134 (General article, underage drinking). The Applicant was separated due to a positive urinalysis for THC in October of 1994. 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 19910604. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, and to request an administrative board. The Applicant’s wife provided documentation that included: death certificate, marriage certificate, congressional correspondence, and letters from family, a long time friend, and a former employer.
: (D ecisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The App licant’s wife contends his discharge is inequitable , because it was based on an isolated incident after three years of honorable service. Despite a service member’s prior record of service , certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the 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 Applicant was found guilty of violation of Article 112a , but his command did not pursue a punitive discharge , opting instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB determined an upgrade is not appropriate.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant’s wife contends that you th and immaturity were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. The NDRB recognizes that many of our service members are young at the time they enlist for service but still manage to serve honorably. While we understand some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB does not view a member’s claim of immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was warranted.

S ummary: 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 .


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 | MD1200247

    Original file (MD1200247.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. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002356

    Original file (MD1002356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Between November 1998 and June 2000, the Applicant received three NJPs, one civil arrest, and one 6105 retention warning, which included underage drinking, drunk on duty, driving while intoxicated, failure to obey orders and regulations, wrongful cohabitation with a female not his wife, and failure to pay debts and child support payments on time.Per the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, an Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700916

    Original file (ND0700916.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “MISCONDUCT ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Awarded - FOP ($200.00) for (2...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701126

    Original file (ND0701126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s case involved actual physical abuse by slapping his wife. Regarding characterization of service, the Board found no prejudice to the Applicant in light of his record of misconduct (in fact, the errors were a benefit to the Applicant) and determined that a change to honorable was not warranted.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000922

    Original file (ND1000922.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900246

    Original file (ND0900246.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. ” 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 NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300898

    Original file (MD1300898.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical evaluation by a military psychologist during separation noted the Applicant’s diagnosis of PTSD could have an impact on his behavior but determined his pattern of misconduct started before the Applicant’s deployment to Iraq in March 2006. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101485

    Original file (MD1101485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant completed his service obligation, his record of service included evidence of significant negative aspects and his average Conduct marks did not meet the requirement to issue him an Honorable discharge. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301724

    Original file (MD1301724.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing the Applicant’s issues, supporting documents, and the evidence of record, the NDRB determined his separation for a Pattern of Misconduct was proper. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701248

    Original file (ND0701248.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. ” 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 NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for...