Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301496
Original file (MD1301496.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130724
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)       20000525 - 20000808     Active:  

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20000809     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20040806      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 28 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
MOS: 0451
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (3) Pistol ( 2 ) MM

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:     SCM:     SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling:

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):        20080918
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:   MD08-01416
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:                 Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.
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. 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 never used drugs.
2. The Applicant contends his characterization of service was unjust.
3. The Applicant contends his post - service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 4 0 328           
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. T he Board did complete 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 no 6105 counseling warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. However, the Applicant’s record did have the Summary of Witness Testimony for an investigation of his alleged drug use leading to his discharge for violation of the Marine Corps zero-tolerance drug policy. 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 23 May 2000 . Based on the Marine Corps drug policy 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 . The administrative board found by a vote of 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported the use of controlled substances and voted that the Applicant be separated Under Other T han Honorable Conditions.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he never used drugs. The Applicant’s discharge for drug abuse was as a result of a n NCIS investigation in which the Applicant admitted to drug use during three different interviews. Not only did the Applicant admit to illegal drug use during the investigation, other Marines corroborated his story , stating that they had witness ed and used drugs with the Applicant. Although the Applicant contends the investigation was conducted due to false allegations from another Marine who had tampered with parachutes, the NDRB found no improprieties with the investigation or its results. T he NDRB determined the Applicant was given a fair process and a preponderance of the evidence shows that the discharge was proper and equitable . Relief denied.

 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his punishment was unjust. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Marine Corps. The total service of the Applicant was reviewed by an Administrative Separation Board that weighed all the evidence surround ing the misconduct. The NDRB also viewed the entire service of the Applicant at his personal hearing and determined that a preponderance of the evidence support ed discharge for violation of the Marine Corps drug policy, that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a n Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.





: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post- service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. The Applicant provided a personal statement, eight character references , evidence of completing over three years of college, and his Sheriff’s badge. The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does show he is doing well as a civilian, but it does not mitigate the severity of his in-service misconduct enough to warrant an upgrade . 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 is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149. Their website can be found at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm . 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901232

    Original file (MD0901232.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Additionally, the NDRB advises the Applicant that self-admission of illegal drug use to investigators is sufficient evidence for separation from the Marine Corps. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901356

    Original file (MD0901356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of 3-0, an administrative discharge board found that the Applicant had committed misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation and that the Applicant’s discharge characterization should be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The record reflects that the Applicant’s administrative separation board was conducted in accordance with Marine Corps’ policies and standards.The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service in order...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401575

    Original file (MD1401575.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - 20121018: Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) Awarded: Suspended: 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401400

    Original file (MD1401400.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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200285

    Original file (MD1200285.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant violated the Marine Corps Drug Policy, was found guilty at NJP, was punished, and then faced mandatory discharge processing that resulted in a proper and fair Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401462

    Original file (MD1401462.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 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801487

    Original file (MD0801487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined an upgrade would be appropriate.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 the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500786

    Original file (MD1500786.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. It is the authority of the Separation Authority to determine the characterization of service warranted under an administrative discharge. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500010

    Original file (MD1500010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not warrant relief. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000095

    Original file (MD1000095.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of 3 to 0, the administrative separation board found a factual basis for misconduct, drug abuse, and recommended the Applicant be discharged from the Naval Service by reason of misconduct, drug abuse, receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service, his discharge should not be suspended, and he should not be retained in the Individual Ready Reserve.Issue 1: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants to reenlist in the Army. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review...