Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401045
Original file (MD1401045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140512
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to: CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERMENT

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20070911 - 20071021     Active:   20071022 - 20111104 HON

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20111105     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20120506      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 02 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 96
MOS: 5939
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /          Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2) (2) C o C LoA MM

Periods of UA / CONF :

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

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 071022 UNTIL 111104 ”
         “ ”
         “ 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 :        


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends he was never convicted of any offenses at N onjudic i al P unishment (NJP) or court-martial .
2.       The Applicant contends he signed his administrative separation paperwork while in duress due to a poor command climate.
3.       The Applicant contends he should have been discharged at the Conv enience of the Government as he was originally notified .

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0826           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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included no 6105 counseling warnings and no misconduct resulting in NJP or court-martial. However, the Applicant had a P age 11 counseling entry dated 9 February 2012 stating that he was evaluated by mental health professionals at the Naval Health Department after he called the police because of a desire to hurt himself on 30 January 2012 . During his subsequent evaluation , he revealed and was diagnosed with a substance abuse psychosis and polysubstance abuse . He was immediately notified of his command’s intent to separate him on the basis of Conv enience of the Government, Personality Disorder. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. After receiving this notification , the Applicant tested positive for opiates, PCP, and THC on two separate urinalyses with samples taken on 20 January 2012 and 24 February 2012. He subsequently refused to provide a urinalysis sample during a random squadron urinalysis on 30 March 2012. 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 10 September 2007 . Based on the multiple violations of the Marine Corps zero-tolerance drug policy, processing for administ rative separation is mandator y. When re- notified of a dministrative separation processing for M isconduct (D rug A buse ) and Misconduct (Serious Offense) using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was never convicted of any offenses at NJP or court-martial. In accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, servicemembers may be separated based on the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the commanding officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial for the same or closely related offense. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction, however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. When notified of the intent to take the Applicant to NJP for violation of the Marine Corps drug policy, the Applicant refused NJP and demanded court-martial. While this is his right, there is no requirement that his command must then take him to a court-martial. Instead, his command decided not to refer charges to a court-martial but to instead process the Applicant for an administrative discharge. The Applicant was provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative separation board, but he waived that right, thus accepting the discharge recommended in the letter of notification.





Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of the Marine Corps drug policy 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. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he signed his administrative separation paperwork while in duress due to a poor command climate. 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 that he was wrongfully discharged , treated unfairly, denied due process, or suffered due to a poor command climate . The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he should have been discharged at the Conv enience of the Government as he was originally notified . Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons , such as Convenience of the Government, Personality Disorder . While the Applicant was notified of separation proceedings for a Personality Disorder in February 2012, subsequent misconduct resulted in his command re-notifying him of separation processing for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) and Misconduct (Serious Offense). After a complete review of the records, the NDRB determined the Applicant was provided full due process and all applicable rights and was properly and equitably discharged for Misconduct (Drug Abuse). 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.

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 .


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 | 2015_Marine | MD1401485

    Original file (MD1401485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends because his command did not afford him proper counseling with time for follow-up evaluation, his command was not in compliance with the MARCORSEPMAN and the Applicant should be granted relief. The Applicant contends because his command did not afford him proper counseling with time for follow-up evaluation, his command not in compliance with the MARCORSEPMAN and the Applicant should be granted relief. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300873

    Original file (MD1300873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant’s mother that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. The NDRB determined his command did not purposely hold his administrative separation board before his civilian court date, and the Applicant received full due process during the administrative proceedings. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401495

    Original file (MD1401495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20130221: Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing forwarded Report of Misconduct to the Commandant of the Marine Corps recommending the Applicant’s administrative separation as a probationary officer via notification procedures. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201303

    Original file (ND1201303.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902164

    Original file (MD0902164.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Summary: After a thorough...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401588

    Original file (MD1401588.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400191

    Original file (MD1400191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of controlled substances)Awarded: Suspended: SCM:SPCM:CC: Retention Warning Counseling: [Extracted from Commanding Officer, III Marine Expeditionary Force Headquarters Group, Administrative Separation Proceedings letter dated 14 February 2012] 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902583

    Original file (MD0902583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000547

    Original file (MD1000547.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101515

    Original file (MD1101515.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident. 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...