Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400808

Original file (MD1400808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20140320

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)       19991027 - 19991227     Active:          19991228 - 20030930
                                             20031001 - 20111212

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20111213     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20140227      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 15 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 81
MOS: 0629
Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (6) Pistol (4) (3) (2) MUC (4) ACM ( 3 ) ( 4 ) (5) MM BPI

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 20130822 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC: N ONE          Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ MISCONDUCT ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps , MMSB-13, 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 administrative separation board was improper and inequitable.

Decision

Date: 20140527 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 in his current enlistment included one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances) . 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 9 September 1999 . 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 request an administrative board . The administrative board determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported that the Applicant had committed misconduct and recommended separation Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his administrative separation board was improper and inequitable. The Applicant specifically contends his right to remain silent was violated, the senior member of the administrative separation board pressured the other two board members into recommending an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization , and that he was not given the opportunity to submit a L etter of D eficiency. The NDRB 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 submitted a Memorandum of Deficient Administrative Separation Process written from the defense counsel to the Applicant dated 26 February 2014, an e-mail from an administrative separation board member to the defense counsel dated 26 February 2014, and the record of his administrative separation board in support of his contention s . The record shows the Applicant waived his right to a trial by court-martial and was found guilty at NJP on 22 August 2013 for violation of UCMJ Articles 92 and 112a. The record also shows the Applicant’s administrative separation board determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported that the Applicant had committed misconduct . The administrative separation board was held on 16 January 2014 and the Authentication of Record was signed on 24 January 2014. The NDRB did not have the Separati on Authority’s letter or the commanding officer’s recommendation . However, the record shows the Applicant was separated from the Marine Corps on 27 February 2014, six weeks following his administrative separation board . The responsibility for the submission of the Letter of Deficiency falls onto the Applicant’s defense counsel and the lack of submission does not bar the Separati on Authority from separating the servicemember . The NDRB determined the Memorandum of Deficient Administrative Separation Process and the Applicant’s personal statement s do not overcome the presumption of regularity that the Applicant was afforded his due process rights. Likewise, the e-mail document submitted does not show the senior member of the administrative board improperly influenced the other board members. However, the e-mail shows that the two junior members made their final decision after receiving legal clarification. 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 submit ted documentation does not rebut the presumption of regularity in governmental affairs by the NDRB. The NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity , and the Applicant’s separation for misconduct was appropriate. 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 | MD1400644

Original file (MD1400644.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 6206,...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301231

Original file (MD1301231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

of controlled substances)Awarded: Suspended: SCM:SPCM:CC: Retention Warning Counseling: 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300923

Original file (MD1300923.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Per MARCORSEPMANParagraph 6210.3, separation processing for a pattern of misconduct may not be initiated until the member has been counseled in accordance with the guidelines for counseling set out in paragraph 6105. The evidence provided by the Applicant does not refute the presumption that the Applicant’s administrative board and Separation Authority were correct in their decisions that the Applicant had a proper 6105 counseling warning and was afforded a reasonable opportunity to...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301376

Original file (MD1301376.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 of...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400018

Original file (MD1400018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not warrant relief. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201183

Original file (ND1201183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In carefully reviewing the Applicant’s service record, the NDRB determined the Separation Authority (Commander, Navy Personnel Command)eventually ordered in a message dated 22 December 2006 that the Applicant be separated for Misconduct (Drug Abuse)with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions) after it reviewed the facts of the case and the proceedings of the administrative separation board. As the Separation Authority is the sole authority to determine...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300212

Original file (ND1300212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant requests a change to his reentry (RE) code to reenlist.2. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s notification letter and administrative separation request from his command to determine what characterization of service was recommended to the Separation Authority. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300539

Original file (ND1300539.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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 governmentalaffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301082

Original file (ND1301082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: END OF OBLIGATED SERVICE Summary of Service Prior Service: USNR (DEP)19951229 - 19960115 USNR19960116 - 20010115USNR-R20010116 - 20010117USNR 20010118 - 20031213USNR 20031214 - 20071201USNR 20071202 - 20110103 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20110104Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20110914Highest Rank/Rate:ADCLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 11...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201151

Original file (ND1201151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his commanding officer authorized an Honorable discharge, but while he was gone, the executive officer changed it to a General discharge. Representation: 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400808

Similar Decisions