ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20080408
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)	20010320 - 20010624  		Active:   
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010625		   Period of enlistment:   Years   Months		Date of Discharge:  20030926
Length of Service:    Yrs    Mths  02  Dys	Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  61
MOS:  3521  	Highest Rank:   			Fitness reports:  
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):	/ (NFIR)
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  Rifle: , Pistol: , . 

Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJPs:	
	20030307:  Art 92 (failure to obey lawful order) – 2 specificaitons.
	Awarded - FOP ($316 for 2 months), RESTR EPD (45/45).  Susp - NONE.
	20030605:  Art 92 (failure to obey lawful order) – 2 specifications.
	Awarded - RIR (E2), FOP ($645 for 2 months), RESTR EPD (45/45).  Susp - NONE.

SCMs:	

SPCMs:	

CC:	

6105 Counseling: 
	20030307:  For consuming alcohol underage and walking off-base with an open container in violation of base order.
	20030606:  For illegal drug involvement.

Types of Documents Submitted

Related to Military Service:	DD 214:  	Service and/or Medical Record:  		Other Records:  

Related to Post-Service Period:	
	Employment:  			Finances:  			Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Substance Abuse:			Criminal Records:	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:  		References:  		
	
Additional Statements From Applicant:  		From Representation:  		From Member of Congress:  
Other Documentation (Describe)  

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  Reenlistment opportunities.
2.  No intent.
3.  Isolated incident.
4.  Post service conduct.

Decision

Date:  20080619		Location:  Washington D.C.	 Representation:  

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

Discussion

: ()  .   either  which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or  the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, , regarding .

: ()  .  The applicant claims the mushrooms were bought in Japanese markets and he did not know they were illegal.  Ignorance of the law does not mitigate misconduct.  Furthermore, all members upon arrival in Japan are given a Status of Forces brief in which they are warned of substances available to Japanese Nationals that are illegal for U.S. Servicemen.  The Board also noted the Japanese government made the use, production, trafficking, growing or possession of psilocybin mushrooms illegal in June 2002, which was prior to the Applicant’s arrival in Japan.  Finally, based on the voluntary statement the Applicant gave to the command 1stSgt on 09 March 2003, the Applicant was aware he was suspected of violating UCMJ, Article 112a (illegal use of a controlled substance), and freely admitted to the use of mushrooms on three separate occasions.  The Board found the Applicant was responsible for his actions and determined an upgrade of his discharge would be inappropriate.

: ()  .  The applicant contends his illegal drug use was an isolated incident and his overall record of service is worthy of an honorable discharge.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is appropriate when the member's misconduct outweigh the positive aspects of his service.  In the Applicant's case, his record was marred by two 6105 counselings (retention warnings) and two non-judicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 92 (failure to obey a lawful order) and 86 (absenting himself from appointed place of duty).  Violations of UCMJ Article 92 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge and imprisonment could be awarded if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial.  Furthermore, discharge processing is mandatory for violations of the Marine Corps drug policy.  Again, the Board determined an upgrade to the Applicant's discharge would be inappropriate.

Issue 4: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  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.  The Applicant states he is employed and drug-free as evidence of post-service accomplishments.  The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing.  For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of a drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade of discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.  Again, the Board determined an upgrade to the Applicant's discharge would be inappropriate.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,  Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 
Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective 01 Sep 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.

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violations of the UCMJ, Article 92 (failure to obey lawful order).

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe that 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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.”  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 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.  

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the 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