Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200408
Original file (MD1200408.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20111212
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)       20080123 - 20080127     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080128     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20090926      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r M on ths 30 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 70
MOS: 0121
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2)

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 20090422 :       Article (Wrongful use of a controlled substance, marijuana 74 ng/ml)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”

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 :        

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.       The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident in nearly 20 months of exceptional performance.

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 of a controlled substance, marijuana 74 ng/ml ) . The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using illicit drugs prior to entering the Marine Corps . acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 10 J anuary 2008 . Based on the Article 112a violation , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory . When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel and submitted a request for retention or suspension of administrative discharge. The Applicant’s request for suspension of an administrative discharge was approved on 13 August 2009, however, the Applicant tested positive for marijuana on a second urinalysis on 26 August 2009 , and his administrative discharge suspension was vacated on 16 September 2009.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident in nearly 20 months of exceptional performance. The Applicant contends his exceptional performance was demonstrated by his rifle scores, physical fitness, selection for an E-5 billet, off-duty volunteer work, and his meritorious promotion. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses 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, performance, 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 the Applicant was afforded a final opportunity to conf o rm to expected standards by having his administrative discharge suspended for twelve months . The Applicant’s subsequent positive urinalysis led to his administrative discharge suspension being vacated . The NDRB found the Applicant’s claim of his misconduct being an isolated incident to be inconsistent with his service record and that an upgrade would be inappropriate . 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.




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 | MD1401039

    Original file (MD1401039.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900406

    Original file (MD0900406.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 UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post-service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post-servicedocumentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801542

    Original file (MD0801542.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.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 Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 ADDENDUM: Information...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900832

    Original file (MD0900832.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 UCMJ violations 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101918

    Original file (MD1101918.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801350

    Original file (MD0801350.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1-2. 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 the discharge process was improper. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900615

    Original file (MD0900615.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, Bad Conduct Discharge, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, the UCMJ violations involved, and lack of post-service documentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his...

  • 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0800951

    Original file (MD0800951.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900852

    Original file (MD0900852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...