Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700542
Original file (MD0700542.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-PVT, USMC
MD07-00542
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070315   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT              Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3

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

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: 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 .

Issue 2 (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 other than his own statement. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the Applicant ’s un document ed claim that he has learned from his mistakes did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

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. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. An 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 three discharge warnings, two nonjudicial punishments, and one Summary Court 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) 19960826 - 19960908                    
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19960909               Years Contracted : 4 ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 19991223      
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 03 Mths 14 D ys         Lost Time : Days UA: 2 Days Confine d : 16
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 18     AFQT: 35            MOS: 3531 Highest Rank: LCPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      3.5 ( 9 ) / 3.4 ( 9 )
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): RIFLE MARKSMAN BADGE      

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

 19981106 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 (3 counts) and 107.
Awarded - R IR ( E-2 ) .      

19980106 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to pass a Physical fitness test. Discharge warning issued.
        
19981117 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for inability to perform as a motor vehicle operator due to the loss of NC driver’s license.
     
199 90203 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to maintain basic issue of Marine Corps clothing, failing two wall locker inspections which caused you to be replaced on deployment. Discharge warning issued.      

19990301 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art 86, 92 (2 counts), and 115 .
Awarded - FOP ($ 479 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ) suspended for 6 months.
Appealed and denied.      

19990301 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for your pattern of misconduct as evidenced by NJP’s received on 19981106 and 19990301. Discharge warning issued.

19990615 :        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 (3 counts of failure to go), 92 .
          Awarded - FOP ( $479 ) for ( 1 month); RIR ( E-1 ); Confinement ( 20 days).

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   19990901
Basis for Discharge:      DUE TO
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19990901
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      

Administrative Board Date :       19991206
Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:     BY DUE TO .
                  BY SEPARATION WARRANTED.
Recommendation on Separation:   BY      
Recommendation on Characterization:     BY

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 19991214 )
SJA review (date):       ( 19991223 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING GENERAL, 2D MARINE AIRCRAFT WING ( 19991223 )
Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO:
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19991223


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 P1900.16E), effective 31
Jan 97 until 31 Aug 01.

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 115 .


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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700768

    Original file (MD0700768.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer), Article 92 (Violation, Failure to obey other order), and Article 112 (Drunk on duty). Medical/Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700155

    Original file (MD0700155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. ” 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700880

    Original file (MD0700880.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700516

    Original file (MD0700516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Absent any documentation provided by the Applicant for the Board to consider, the Board determined that the Applicant’s service record did notmitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.An upgrade 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701052

    Original file (MD0701052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.The Applicant’s service was marred by a five discharge warnings and four nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Article(s) 86 and 92. ” 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. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700319

    Original file (ND0700319.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 one retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 [Unauthorized Absence (four specifications)] and Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer).An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.In reviewing discharges, the Board...

  • 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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700795

    Original file (MD0700795.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19930528 - 19930811Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19930812Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19961107Length of Service: 03 Yrs 02Mths26 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 88MOS:2515Highest Rank: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700545

    Original file (MD0700545.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and the standards of discipline, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted. 20-95 Applicant Discharged: 19970710 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: Employment:Finances:Education: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700510

    Original file (MD0700510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and the standards of discipline, the Board determined that some degree of clemency was warranted. Preferred: 19921207Court-martial: 19930317 Findings: Guilty of Article(s) 128, Assault with a means to likely produce grievous bodily harm, 1 specification and 92, Violate a lawful general order, 1 specification Sentence: BCD; Conf for 60 days; RIR to E-1; FOP ($400) for (2 months) CA action: 19930318 NC&PB Action: 19930715...