ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:
        
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USMCR (DEP)      20091223 - 20100822     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20100823    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20140131     Highest Rank:
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 09 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
MOS: 3531
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): () / ()   Fitness Reports:

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

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:

- 20130419:      Article
         Article 89 (Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer)
         Article 134 (General article – Disorderly conduct, drunkenness)
         Awarded: Suspended: [Vacated on 20130421]

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20130419:      For your violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 89 (Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer), and Article 134 (General article – Disorderly conduct, drunkenness)

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 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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Types of Witnesses Who Testified

         Expert:           Character:      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present.

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 psychosis led to his misconduct.

Decision


Date: 20150521           Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

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

Discussion

As a result of the Applicant’s claim that a mental health diagnosis impacted their discharge, and in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (e)(2), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist. The Applicant submitted documents which appear to be in his own handwriting that he claimed he was diagnosed with psychosis. 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 warning and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 89 (Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer), Article 134 (General article – Disorderly conduct, drunkenness). Additionally, the record shows the Applicant had continued misconduct and his previously suspended punishment was vacated. Furthermore, the record shows the Applicant made a voluntary statement which described his extensive in-service wrongful use of Spice and Triple C’s (cold medicine). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, the charges were referred to a special court-martial. Subsequently, the Applicant under the advice of qualified defense counsel submitted a request to have the charges and specifications withdrawn from special court-martial and agree to accept NJP where he would plead guilty. Per the stipulations of his pre-trial agreement, the Applicant right to request an administrative separation board. Additionally, the Applicant waived his rights to submit a written statement.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his psychosis led to 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. However, the Applicant submitted documents which appear to be in his own handwriting that he claimed he was diagnosed with psychosis. Nevertheless, the record clearly shows the Applicant was afforded the opportunity for a special court-martial where he would have had the opportunity to bring forth mitigating factors to include mental health issues. Instead, the Applicant submitted a request to have the charges and specifications withdrawn from a special court-martial and plead guilty at NJP. Though the Applicant may feel that psychosis 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 psychosis was a sufficient mitigating factor to excuse the Applicant’s conduct or accountability concerning his actions. The service record clearly shows the Applicant was evaluated by competent medical authority and they determined, “The Member does not have a medical condition that may impact his behavior.” Additionally, the record shows that the Applicant had extensive in-service wrongful use of Spice and cold medicine. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s incidences of misconduct were all conscious decisions to violate the tenants of honorable and faithful service. Additionally, the NDRB determined that the Applicant already received significant mitigation from the Convening Authority by withdrawing the charges and specifications from a special court-martial. After an exhaustive review, the NDRB determined that psychosis did not excuse or mitigate the Applicant’s misconduct. 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 UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS 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 Ap

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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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