ex-, USMC 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20090323
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)	20070703 - 20070812  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20070813	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20080215	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  03  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  34
MOS:  9971
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   () /  ()	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  

Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJP:  
- 20080115:	Article 112a (Drugs - marijuana)
	Awarded:     Suspended:  

SCM:  

SPCM:  

CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20080115:	For wrongful use of a controlled substance, specifically, 30ng marijuana on 20071211.

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:		Substance Abuse:			Criminal Records:	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:  		References:  		
              Additional Statements: 
                             From Applicant:  	From Representation:         	From Congress member:    

                    Other Documentation:  

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. Non-decisional.  Applicant desires to reenlist in the Army or National Guard.
2. Decisional.  Applicant states he was not told about the negative implications associated with the characterization of his discharge.

Decision

Date:  20091008		Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

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

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 Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Applicant did not identify any decisional issues to the Board.  However, the Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service reflects one 6105 counseling warning, and one non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 112a (Wrongful use of a controlled substance, marijuana).  The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana four times prior to entering the Marine Corps.  A signed acknowledgement of his complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs was not found in his record; however, the NDRB presumed the Applicant understands of the zero-tolerance policy on illegal drug use.  Based on the offense committed, processing for administrative separation was mandatory.  When process for separation, the Applicant waived his right to consult with qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.  

:  (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to reenlist in the Army or National Guard.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other branch of the Armed Forces, and 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 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.

Issue 2:  (Decisional) (Propriety) (RELIEF NOT WARRANTED) The Applicant claimed that neither his Administrative NCO nor his Company Commander fully explained the ramifications associated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.  He inferred that the characterization of his discharge was changed several months after he was first briefed.
Per his service records, the Applicant was presented by the Commanding Officer, Headquarters and Service Battalion, School of Infantry (Camp Pendleton, CA) with a written notification of the recommended characterization of his discharge, which was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.  The Applicant acknowledged written receipt of this notification on 28 January 2008.  He voluntarily waived his right to discuss his discharge with a military attorney, who would have fully explained the type of discharge for which he was being recommended and the military benefits he would lose.  The Applicant provided no evidence that he was not given his full legal rights or advised on the consequences of his discharge.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found   Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS, and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his discharge, 15 February 2008.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct.

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 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court-martial 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 other medical related reasons.”  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 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