Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700380
Original file (MD0700380.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-PVT, USMC
MD07-00380
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070201   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT              Authority: MARCORSEPMAN para 6210.3

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. No issues submitted.
Decision

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

Date: 20 071018                                             Location: Washington D.C.

Discussion

 The 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 Applicant does not deny this misconduct. T he evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for h is c onduct 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 under other than 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 conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of three retention warnings and three nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article ( s ) 86, 92, and 111. V iolation s of UCMJ Article (s) 92 and 111 are considered a 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.

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. 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, t he Board found that


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20020807 - 20021014               
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20021015      Years Contracted : 4 ; Extension:         Date of Discharge: 20040824
Length of Service : 01 Yrs   10 Mths 2 D ys   Lost Time : Days UA: 8 Days Confine d :
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 17 Parental Consent AFQT: 35 MOS: 0311 Highest Rank: LCPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      3.3 ( 7 ) / 3.2 ( 7 )
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, RIFLE MARKSMANSHIP BADGE




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

20030930:        MARC ORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for inability to follow instructions , lack of discipline, and disregard for authority. Discharge warning issued.
20040414 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 and 111 .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 668 ) for ( 2 months) , suspended for (6 months) ; RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days). No appeal.

20040503 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 and 92 .
          Awarded - FOP ($ 596 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days). No appeal.

20040504:        MARC ORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failed adherence to regulations resulting in your NJP on 20040503. Discharge warning issued.

20040518:        Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Center evaluation report recommending IMPACT training and Outpatient treatment. Individual should be held strictly accountable for actions.

20040615:        Completed IMPACT program.

20040618 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 596 ) for ( 2 months , 1 month suspended for 6 months ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days). No appeal.

20040618:        MARC ORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failed adherence to regulations resulting in your NJP on 20040618. Discharge warning issued.


Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   20040722
Basis for Discharge:      DUE TO

Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20040722
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20040722 )
SJA review (date):       ( 20040813 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING GENERAL, 2D MARINE DIVISION ( 20040819 )
Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20040824









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. 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 .

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 and 111.


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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801241

    Original file (MD0801241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700751

    Original file (MD0700751.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)20020725 - 20020902Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020903Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20051222Length of Service: 03 Yrs 03Mths20 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700744

    Original file (MD0700744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, after a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate in light of the nature and seriousness of the Applicant’s misconduct, and that the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient to convince the Board that an upgrade was appropriate at this time. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700956

    Original file (ND0700956.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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700258

    Original file (ND0700258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record clearly reflects that the applicant established a pattern of misconduct evident by two nonjudicial punishments for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 92 (failure to obey an order), and Article 111 (Drunken and reckless operation of a vehicle). Discharge Process Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700318

    Original file (ND0700318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by two retention warnings, the award of six nonjudicial punishment (NJP), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article 87 (Missing Movement), and Article 92 (Disobeying a lawful order). 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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701093

    Original file (MD0701093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the circumstances that resulted in the characterization of discharge.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. 20050318: Vacate FOP for 1 month, Restr and Extra duties for 45 days awarded at NJP dated 20050116.20050331: MARCORSEPMAN 6105...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701054

    Original file (MD0701054.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) 20000720 - 20010610 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010611Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20040217Length of Service: 02 Yrs 08 Mths07 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level:...