Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300404

Original file (MD1300404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20121214

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)       20100206 - 20100718     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20100719     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20111014      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
MOS: 0352
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 20110527 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - take an over - the - counter drug with intent to induce intoxicat i on , excitement, or stupefaction of the central nervous system)
         Awarded : Susp ended: 15 DAYS

- 20110625 :      Article (General A rticle - breaking restriction)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20110818 :       Article (General A rticle - breaking restriction)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20110526 :       For drug abuse. Specifically, on 20110423 you admitted to taking over - the - counter drugs with the intent to induce intoxication, excitement, or stupefaction. You gave this statement after being read your rights.

- 20110620 :       For breaking restriction.

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 hazing by his superiors , to include physical, mental, and sexual abuse , led to his misconduct.
2.       The Applicant contends his P ost- T raumatic S tress D isorder (PTSD) mitigates his misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0411          Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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

Discussion

As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD, in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board reviewed the Applicant’s record to see if he deployed in support of a contingency operation and was, as a consequence of that deployment, diagnosed with either PTSD or Traumatic Brain Injury. A review of his record revealed that he did not deploy in support of a contingency operation, and so his case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1).

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 Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - take an over-the-counter drug with intent to induce intoxication, excitement, or stupefaction of the central nervous system) and Article (General Article - breaking restriction, 2 specifications). 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 3 February 2011. Based on the Marine Corps drug policy violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant right to consult with a qualified counsel but waived his right to submit a written statement.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends hazing by his superiors , to include physical, mental, and sexual abuse , led to his misconduct. The Commanding Officer, 3 rd Battalion, 7 ^th Marines recommendation for administrative separation acknowledged the allegations of hazing and recommended the Applicant be separated Under Other Than Honorable Conditions due to the Applicant’s own misco nduct. The Commanding Officer, 7 ^th Marines concurred with a characterization Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, however, the Separation Authority discharged the Applicant with a characterization of Gener al (Under Honorable Conditions) . After a careful review of the records, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s record , which includes three NJPs , reflects willful misconduct that demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his own conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Violating the Marine Corps drug policy and subsequently breaking restriction on multiple occasions were all conscious decisions to violate the ten ets of honorable and faithful service. However, the Applicant in no way warranted the hazing he received while on active duty, but the NDRB determined he was given mitigation for his misconduct by the Separation Authority when he determined to discharge the Applicant with a General characterization of service. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his PTSD mitigates his misconduct. 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. The NDRB requested the Applicant’s medical treatment records, but the VA was unable to locate them. Furthermore, the NDRB did not find any reference to a medical diagnosis of PTSD in the Applicant’s service record to support his claim, and the Applicant did not provide any documentary evidence of a medical diagnosis by competent medical authorities to support his claim. However, the

Applicant’s separation package did include a combat - related PTSD screening in which competent medical authority screened the Applicant as being negative for PTSD. Though the Applicant may feel that PTSD was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record reflects willful misconduct that demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Lacking any evidence of PTSD, the NDRB is unable to establish this contention as a basis for mitigation or consideration as an extenuating circumstance. R elief 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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700426

Original file (MD0700426.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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20020716 - 20020730Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020731Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20040909Length of Service: 02 Yrs 01Mths09 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100756

Original file (ND1100756.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: NONE 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002314

Original file (MD1002314.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300676

Original file (ND1300676.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, administrative discharge processing is a separate and distinct process from punitive proceedings such as NJP. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101547

Original file (MD1101547.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

For reasons undetermined, the Applicant was not processed for administrative separation from the Marine Corps for Misconduct-Drug Abuse, which would normally result in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. Therefore, in accordance with the MARCORSEPMAN, the awarded characterization of service shall HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501086

Original file (ND1501086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. During the separation proceedings, the Applicant waived his right to consult with counsel, request a hearing before an Administrative Separation Board, and submit a rebuttal to the separation. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400970

Original file (MD1400970.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The notification letter specifically states, “The factual basis for the recommendation of drug abuse is your wrongful possession of designer drug ‘Spice’ on or about 3 June 2010.” The record clearly shows the Applicant exercised his right to counsel and waived his rights to submit a written statement and request an administrative board. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101434

Original file (ND1101434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends Spice was not illegal to be sold in retail at the time of his discharge. 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,...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001916

Original file (MD1001916.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 5 Aug 2009, the Applicant’s Battalion Commanding Officer submitted his final endorsement recommending the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to pattern of misconduct and drug abuse. 2x OIF, evaluated for PTSD.” On 16 Sep 2009, the Separation Authority (Commanding General) directed that the Applicant be administratively discharged for drug abuse as recommended by his chain of command. ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000586

Original file (ND1000586.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 08 April 2009, the Separation Authority approved the Command’s recommendation for discharge and designated that the basis for separation would be Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense), having determined that the evidence of record supported the discharge and that the characterization of service as recommended, was warranted. The Separation Authority reviewed the evidence of record and the gravity of the charges and directed the Applicant be discharged for Misconduct (Commission of...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300404

Similar Decisions