Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401415
Original file (MD1401415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140715
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)       20060905 - 20060905     Active:  

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060906     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20091221      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 16 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 33
MOS: 3531
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20080317 :      Article ( Absence without leave ) 20080215 – 20080218; 4 days. [ Extracted from Unit Punishment Book: failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Battalion Commander’s Pr e-Deployment Gear Inspection, dated 20080315 ]
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20090227 :       Article 2 specifications (Absence without leave)
         Article 3 specifications (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
          Article (General article)
         Awarded: Suspended: (vacated for 2 months)

SCM:

- 20090702 :       Art icle (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances M arijuana 24 ng/ml)
                         
CC:

Retention Warning Counseling : 11

- 20080207 :      For violation of the UCMJ, article 86.


- 20080413 :      For understand ing I am not eligible for promotion for a period of 3 months due to my conviction at Company Level NJP on 080317 unless waived by proper authority.

- 20081205 :       For understanding I am eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of January 2009 promotion period due to my lack of initiative and responsibility for being PME non-compliant as per battalion policy.

- 20090112 :      For understanding I am eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of February 2009 promotion period due to pending legal action.

- 20090210 :      For understanding I am eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of March 2009 promotion period due to my pending legal action.

- 20090306 :      For understanding that I am ineligible for promotion for 6 months as a result of my suspension. I understand that my pros/cons are 3.2 / 3.2 as a result of reduction in rank.

- 20090515 :      For illegal drug involvement; marijuana usage. Also, for understanding I am not eligible for promotion for a period of 18 months due to my illegal drug involvement as confirmed by NavDrugLab SD.

- 20090901 :      For the following deficiencies: violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ, spe ci fically wrongful use of an illegal substance. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s administrative remarks { 1070} 20090901 ]
         For understanding I am eligible but not recommended for promotion to Lance Corporal for the month of October 2009 promotion period due to my recent or pending legal action.

- 20091019 :      For the following misconduct; violation of the UCMJ, Article 91.
- 20091110 :      For understanding I am eligible but not recommended for promotion to Lance Corporal for the month of December 2009 promotion period due to lack of maturity, lack of responsibility, recent or pending legal action, recent counseling statements.

- 20091216 :      For understanding I am eligible but not recommended for promotion to Lance Co rporal for the month of January 2010 promotion period due to lack of maturity, lack of responsibility, recent or pending legal action, recent counseling statements.
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 suggests his discharge is improper: “Because of false acusations [sic] against me”.

Decision


 Date: 20 1 4 102 1            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 sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included eleven 6105 counseling warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Absence without leave , ), Article ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , ), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation ; failure to perform assigned duties , 1 specification), and Article ( General article ; communicating a threat , ); and for of the UCMJ: Article (Title of Article, ). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver prior to entering the Marine Corps, acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 16 January 2006 . 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 22 October 2009, an Administrative Separation Board convened and determined by unanimous vote that a preponderance of evidenced proved the Applicant’s wrongful drug abuse, that the Applicant should be discharged from the Marine Corps, and that the Applicant’s characterization of service should be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant suggests his discharge is improper: “Because of false acusations [sic] against me”. The Applicant was discharged for reason of drug abuse after testing positive with 24 ng/ml of THC (marijuana) on a command urinalysis test. The Applicant was found guilty at SCM for wrongful drug use, and an Administrative Separation Board determined a preponderance of evidence proved the charge of wrongful drug use against him. 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 improperly discharged for false accusations of drug abuse. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0501386

    Original file (MD0501386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Commanding Officer’s comments: “Lance Corporal J_(Applicant) was convicted on 13 August 2002 on felony charges of drug possession and sentenced to pay a $500.00 fine and serve 1 year on probation. The Applicant’s service was marred by nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violation of Article 112a (wrongful use, possession of controlled...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401249

    Original file (MD1401249.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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE. ” Additional Reviews...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500271

    Original file (MD0500271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00271 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20041129. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Letter from Applicant (3 pgs), undtd Statement in Support of Claim from Applicant (2 pgs), undtd Letter from Applicant dtd February 25, 2005 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600338

    Original file (MD0600338.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ]990416: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: In that Lance Corporal M_ A. D_(Applicant), did, on or about 990415, fail to obey a lawful regulation, to wit: Paragraph 5, Marine Corps ALMAR 5/99 dtd 231923 Jan 99, by not consenting to the Anthrax Immunization Shot. Not appealed.991220: Commanding Officer, Headquarters Company, 6 th Marine Regiment, 2d Marine...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00234

    Original file (MD01-00234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I knew and tried to explain to my unit that if I was transferred I would never get to see my son again. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Lake County, Florida Final Judgment dtd 20 Jul 2000 Visitation ScheduleCopy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500452

    Original file (MD0500452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Failure to Participate (Reserve not on active duty) (administrative discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6213. [Unsatisfactory drill participation in the United States Marine Corps Reserve.] The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500485

    Original file (MD0500485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Propriety or Equity Issue(s):Statement: In accordance with 32 CFR § 724, and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, the Veterans of Foreign Wars submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition He was awarded a Bad Conduct Discharge pursuant to the findings of his guilt on one specification of unauthorized absence and 3 specifications of larceny. While there is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600179

    Original file (MD0600179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00179 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051101. I just feel that I deserve a chance to walk proud again.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant, dtd April 24, 2006 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19870225–19870909 COG Active: None Period of Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600294

    Original file (MD0600294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and from an attached letter to the Board: “ I’m requesting an upgrade because I would like to receive benefits, especially for college funds.” “To Whom It May Concern; My name is M_ O_ [Applicant], and on December 19 th , 2000 I was discharged from the Marine Corps with a General (Under Honorable...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501458

    Original file (MD0501458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Applicant chose not to make a statement.040109: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Feb 04 due to Pending Disciplinary Charges/Non-judicial Punishment. Article 92: Specification 1: In that Lance Corporal B_ F. O_(Applicant), U.S. Marine Corps, on active duty, did, at Camp Pendleton, CA, on or about 11 December 2003, violate a lawful general order, to wit: paragraph 6310.c of Base...