Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700239
Original file (MD0700239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-, USMC
MD07-00239
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20061211   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT                   Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlist.
                           2. Educational opportunities.
                           3. Post service.

Decision

 By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) .        
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain MISCONDUCT.

Date: 2007 100 2 Location: Washington D.C. The Board found that


Issue (s) 1-2: The Board determined that th ese Issue (s) are n ot issue (s) which can form the basis for relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum .

Issue 3 (Equity). The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 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 that 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 provided no documentation of post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, educational pursuits, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

T he Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant committed a pattern of misconduct. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for h is conduct or that he should not be held accountable for h is actions. When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by three discharge warnings and two nonjudicial punishments for violating the UCMJ Article(s) 86 Unauthorized absence, 92 Failure to obey order, regulation, 107 False official statements, and 134 Indecent exposure. V iolation s of Article (s) 92, 107, and 134 are considered serious offense s for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate .


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     20010914 - 20020121    
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20020122               Years Contracted :        Date of Discharge: 20060106
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 11 Mths 15 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 41          MOS: 3521 Highest Rank:
Proficiency/Conduct marks ( 4.0/3.7)      
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, MARINE CORPS GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, NAVY UNIT COMMENDATION, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, IRAQ CAMPAIGN MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, NAVY MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION, PRESIDENTIAL UNIT CITATION-NAVY, RIFLE SHARPSHOOTER BADGE

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 20050526 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for violation of Article 91: Disobedience of a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer, and Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation . Discharge warning issued. Applicant refused to sign.

20050526 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for violation of Article 91: Insubordinate conduct towards an NCO and violation of Article 134: Indecent exposure. Discharge warning issued. Applicant refused to sign.

20050608 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for knowingly and willfully disobeyed instructions from MSgt L_ on or about 20050602. In that he went directly to the II MEF Inspector General’s office with a request mast form without properly utilizing his chain of command.

20050608 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling : SNM was counseled and personally ordered by the II MHG commander Col L_ in a counseling session that he was to utilize his own chain of command or appropriate legal action would result. SNM knowingly and willfully disregarded Col L_ in that he sought to request mast through the Base Inspector General.

20051015:        CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 - UA (2 days).
         Awarded - - FOP ($200.00) for (1 month); Restr for (14 days); Extra duties (14 days). FOP suspended for 3 months.

 20051102 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failing to follow simple instruction in proper cleaning techniques, failed to show proper respect towards a noncommissioned officer, and failed to understand the basic principle of authority by not complying to the directions of a noncommissioned officer.

20051117:        CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 134 - Indecent exposure, Art. 107 (2 specs) - (1) False official statement against Lt. L_, False official statement, in that SNM had Sports Medicine receptionist make a false document for an appointment that did not exist, Art. 92 - Failure to obey order or regulation, Art. 86 - Absence without leave
         Awarded - - FOP ($346.00) for (2 months); RIR (E-2); Restr for (30 days); Extra duties (30 days). FOP suspended for 6 months.

 20051121 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for recently found in violation of Art. 134, 107 x 2, 92 and 86 at a Group NJP on 20051117. Discharge warning issued.

20051208 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to conform to standards and processing for administrative separation. Specifically, in November 2005, you went to the Group Personnel Administration Center and proceeded to disrespect a noncommissioned officer by verbally assaulting and threatening the NCO with words to the effect of “I’m going to punch him in his mouth. ” Advised being processed for administrative separation.

20051213 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for Article 86, UA and Article 92, failure to obey an order.


Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   UNREADAB LE
Basis for Discharge:      DUE TO
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20051213
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         ( 20051219 )
          Administrative Board                      

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20051219 )
SJA review (date):       ( 20051229 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING GENERAL, II MARINE EXPEDITIONARY FORCE ( 20051229 )
 Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO:
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20060106


Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

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

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective
01 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 .

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 violation of the UCMJ, Article (s) 92, 107, and 134 .


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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700192

    Original file (MD0700192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant claims his medical issues contributed to his misconduct and adverse discharge. (2) Wrongfully possess some amount of marijuana Article 112a: Wrongfully use marijuana.Date Applicant Submitted SILT request: 20051109 Consulted with or Waived Counsel: Acknowledged Understanding Elements: Acknowledged Guilt to: Article(s) 86 and 112a BCD/DD authorized for offense(s) Acknowledged Consequences of OTH: Type of Characterization Requested: Commanding Officer Recommendation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700965

    Original file (MD0700965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred bythreeretention warnings, two nonjudicial punishments (NJP), and a Summary Courts-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 90 (Willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), Article 92 (Willfully disobeying a lawful order), Article 107 (False official statement), and Article 134 (Restriction Breaking) and Article 134 (Adultery). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700683

    Original file (MD0700683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20040323 - 20040509 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20040510Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge:20060407Length of Service: 01 Yrs 10Mths28 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800138

    Original file (MD0800138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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) -Divorce decree 20061121 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801152

    Original file (MD0801152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There was no evidence in the record, nor was any submitted by the Applicant, documenting he was not responsible for his actions or that the misconduct should be excused based on youth and immaturity. Again, the Board determined an upgrade 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. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800376

    Original file (MD0800376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .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. ” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700714

    Original file (MD0700714.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT Date: 20071205Location:Washington D.C.Representation: Discussion Issue 1: 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. 20031201 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20040104) SJA...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700964

    Original file (MD0700964.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - Restr for (14 days).20060602: Applicant voluntarily waives his right to an Administrative Discharge Board.20060619: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Separation Physical Diagnosis: Fit For Separation. ” 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. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601219

    Original file (MD0601219.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was afforded appropriate treatment for his alcohol abuse problem, and his discharge for misconduct was suspended for one year in order to provide him an opportunity to rehabilitate his performance and conduct. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700293

    Original file (MD0700293.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that...