Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700509
Original file (MD0700509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-PVT, USMC
MD07-00509
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 200070307          Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT              Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Should not have been held responsible for third NJP.
                           2. No command help for my misconduct.
                           3. Post service (alcohol treatment).

Decision

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

Date: 20 071101             Location: Washington D.C.         Representation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 (Equity). 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 serious 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 n 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 one retention warning and three NJP’s for violations of the UCMJ for Article(s) 92 and 128. V iolation s of UCMJ Article (s) 92 and 128 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.

Issue 2 (Equity). The Applicant implies that he was treated unfairly by his unit. 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. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the command unfairly singled him out for discipline or did not support him. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

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, good conduct, or favorable endorsements 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 for post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of a drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the Applicant ’s un document ed claim of post-service sobriety 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. 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) 20020812 - 20030804                     
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20030805               Years Contracted : 4 ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20060505      
Length of Service : 02 Yrs   09 Mths   00 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 18     AFQT: 79              MOS: 0656      Highest Rank: LCPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      4.0 ( 7 ) / 3.9 ( 7 )         
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): IRAQ CAMPAIGN MEDAL, SSDR,GWOTSM, NDSM, RIFLE EXPERT BADGE.      

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

 20040805 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling concerning first NJP for violation of Article 92 x 2. Discharge warning issued.

20040806 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art icle 92 x 2 for underage drinking in the barracks.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 668 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days).
         No appeal.      

20050211 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling concerning NJP for Article 92 (drinking while underage) and Article 128, assault. Discharge warning issued.

20050211 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art icle(s) 92 for underage drinking and 128, assault on LCpl P_.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 617 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days).
         No appeal.      

20060206 :        Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program: Unable to screen patient due to a positive breathalyzer test of .05.
         Recommendation: Reschedule screening through Unit SACO.

20060208 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art icle 92, failed to go to SARP treatment.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 636 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days).
         Appealed intended but no record of appeal.      

20060328 :        Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program: Refusal of screening regarding my substance abuse.      

20060302 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling concerning pattern of misconduct. NJP’s on 20040806, 20050211, and 20060208. Being processed for administrative separation.


Discharge Process

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

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20060302      
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20060303 )
SJA review (date):       ( 20060421 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, 2D MARINE LOGISTICS GROUP ( 20060426 )
Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:            

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 P1900.16 F) , 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 92 and 128.


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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700336

    Original file (ND0700336.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20060502) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, SUBMARINE GROUP 3 (20060509)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20060529 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701082

    Original file (MD0701082.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) 20030108 - 20030120 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030121Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20060908Length of Service: Yrs Mths17 Dys Lost Time: Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700365

    Original file (ND0700365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - FOP ($692.00) for (2 months); RIR (E-3); Restr for (30 days); Extra duties (30 days).20021107: Retention Warning for unauthorized absence, wrongfully consume alcoholic beverages as a minor, dereliction of duty, failure to obey a lawful order.20031207: NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700136

    Original file (ND0700136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharger and characterization of his service. Awarded - FOP $200.00 -2 months; Restr - 30 days; Extra duties - 30 days.19991020: Retention Warning forfailure to obey a lawful written instruction (underage drinking).20000210: CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • 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 | 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:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700404

    Original file (ND0700404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the record that the Separation Authority failed to consider all relevant factors, including the Applicant’s overall service, in determining that an under than honorable conditions discharge was warranted. 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. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700541

    Original file (ND0700541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s summary of service clearly documents the Applicants misconduct resulting in a civilian conviction and four nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, four specifications), 92 (failure to obey), 107 (false official statement, two specifications) and 128 (assault). The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and the characterization of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700827

    Original file (MD0700827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700657

    Original file (MD0700657.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)19960221 - 19960225Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19960226Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19970213Length of Service: 00 Yrs 11Mths18 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...