Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200973
Original file (MD1200973.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120327
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)       20050523 - 20050531     Active:            20050601 - 20050713
         USMCR (DEP)       20070629 - 20070708

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070709     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20110525      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 17 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 26/39
MOS: 5811
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /                   Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20091026 :       Article (Absence without leave , 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: medical appointment
         Specification 2: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: SACO appointment
         Specification 3: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: SACO appointment
          Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20110107 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20090714 :       For not being in standards with MCO 6100.13, Marine Corps Physical Fitness standard.









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 he was treated unfairly by his command.
2.       The Applicant contends he is innocent.
Decision

Date: 20130205            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 6105 counseling warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Abse nce without leave, 3 specifications ), Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer) , and Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) . The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana nine times prior to entering the Marine Corps, acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 27 June 2007 . On 19 April 2010, t he Applicant tested positive on a unit urinalysis for cocaine. 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, submit a written statement , and request an administrative board . On 0 2 November 2010, t he administrative board voted 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported the allegation that the Applicant committed misconduct due to drug abuse and recommended separation Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The administrative board voted 2-1 to recommend that the separation be suspended. However, on 0 7 January 2011, the Applicant was found guilty at NJP of violating UCMJ Article 92 and the Commanding Officer, Headquarters and Support Battalion no longer concurred with the administrative board’s recommendation to suspend the separation.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was treated unfairly by his command. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention the command treated him unfairly. In fact, the record shows that the command gave him multiple opportunities to correct his behavior. He was not discharged after his first NJP in 2009, and his command was going to support the separation board’s recommendation that his discharge for drug abuse be suspended, until he again committed misconduct in January 2011. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he is innocent. As evidence, the Applicant provided a hair follicle drug test that was administered on 0 2 July 2010. The Applicant’s positive urinalysis for cocaine was administered on 19 April 2010. The Applicant further contends that the administrative board recorder used false evidence against him in regards to the length of hair required for a hair follicle test. The Applicant used the hair follicle drug test as evidence during his administrative board , and his counsel submitted a Letter of Deficiency regarding the length of hair required for a hair follicle test. The NDRB presumed regularity in governmental affairs in that the Separation Authority and Staff Judge Advocate review of the discharge package ensured that the Applicant was afforded all of his administrative rights pursuant to the separation process. The Applicant did not submit any new documentation that the administrative board did not have to rebut any presumption of regularity in governmental affairs by the NDRB. 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 r emain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for 15 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101104

    Original file (ND1101104.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/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901549

    Original file (ND0901549.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. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000588

    Original file (MD1000588.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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300125

    Original file (ND1300125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of a controlled substance) on 5 October 2005, which is the day before she provided a urine sample for a random drug test. ” 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013814

    Original file (AR20080013814.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The Applicant states in effect: ”A General discharge does not accurately characterize my service in the United States Army. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900632

    Original file (ND0900632.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law (cont) B. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901471

    Original file (ND0901471.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. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900565

    Original file (MD0900565.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00852

    Original file (MD03-00852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00852 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030409. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Upon receiving the test results, 1st Sgt.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800103

    Original file (ND0800103.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - ,,, and Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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...