Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200364
Original file (MD1200364.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110927
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)       19940224 - 19940228     Active:   19940301 - 19971021 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19971022     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19981209      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r M on th 19 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 69
MOS: 6113
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): 4.9 ( ) / 4.9 ( )      Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      ( 2 ) CoC LoA

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 19980720 :      Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , anabolic steroids )
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 940301 UNTIL 971021 ”
         “ ”
         “ 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:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
          From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident.
2.       The Applicant contends the presiding officer at his administrative separation board said he did not deserve a second chance since the Applicant entered the Marine Corps on a drug waiver .
 3.       The Applicant contends he received a harsher discharge than the Marine he was with when they were caught crossing the Mexican border with steroids.
4.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 2 1018            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 ( Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances, anabolic steroids ) . 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 22 February 1994 . Based on the Article 112a violation , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory . The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package , but his separation code of GKK1 indicates the Applicant did have an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident , and the presiding officer at his administrative separation board said he did not deserve a second chance since the Applicant entered the Marine Corps on a drug waiver. 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 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 the more lenient administrative di scharge. Further, although the results of the Applicant’s administrative separation board were not found in the records, the presiding officer’s statement does not negate the Applicant’s misconduct. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) was proper and equitable. Relief denied .

 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he received a harsher discharge than the Marine he was with when they were caught crossing the Mexican border with steroids. While other members of his unit may have been charged with the same or similar offenses, each case must stand on its own merits. The Commanding Officer is allowed to consider matters for extenuation and mitigation unique to each individual. Therefore , no two cases, no matter how similar, are guaranteed to receive the same punishment. The NDRB determined no impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge. Relief denied.

4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant’s post-service documentation included a personal statement, three letters of character reference, a resume, and a Department of Veteran Affairs vocational rehabilitation acceptance letter . 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 case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Board determined the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. Relief denied.

The NDRB noted several incorrect entries on the Applicant’s DD Form 214. Specifically, Block 18 will change to “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 940301 UNTIL 971021,” Block 24 will change to
 “ , ” and Block 28 will change to “ MISCONDUCT . ” Note that the Applicant violated UCMJ Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances). While he contends he never used illegal drugs, his possession was considered a violation of UCMJ Article 112a and so he was properly and equitably discharged under Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual paragraph 6210.5, Misconduct (Drug Abuse).

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 for additional information.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 January 1997 until 31 August 2001.

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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400992

    Original file (MD1400992.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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200800

    Original file (MD1200800.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: 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00528

    Original file (ND04-00528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    as well as I did not know the illegality of the offense until brought to my attention by the authorities. A single discreditable incident with military or civilian authorities may form the basis for determining the character of a member’s service. The NDRB is authorized, however, 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501379

    Original file (MD0501379.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01379 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050815. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. My hope is that you, the Discharge Review Board, will consider a re-evaluation of the discharge I was given at the time of my administrative separation from the United States Marine Corps.

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300303

    Original file (MD1300303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501231

    Original file (MD0501231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). I had a very good service record and I believe I received the type of discharge I did as an example to the other Marines I was stationed with on Okinawa.I contend that, given my overall honorable service, that I should have at a minimum been afforded the rights of someone who was abusing illegal mind-altering drugs; I understand that drug...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000629

    Original file (MD1000629.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The Good Conduct Medal statement in Block 18 of his DD-214 is a reference to the restart of the time counter for good conduct consideration and is not the awarding of the medal.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301439

    Original file (MD1301439.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: 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. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100281

    Original file (MD1100281.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 the administrative separation process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge.However, based on Applicant and witness testimony, and the evidence presented at the hearing, the awarded...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00565

    Original file (MD99-00565.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. Documentation The applicant provided no documentation. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In the applicant’s issue the Board nothing to justify the...