Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700962
Original file (MD0700962.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-, USMC
MD07-00962

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070703   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT-PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT       Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Discharge was inequitable based on one isolated incident in 42 months of service
        
                  2. Post Service

Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT-PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT

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

Discussion


Issue 1: ( ). The Applicant contends that his problems are attributed to his personal issues the resulted in one incident in 42 months of service . While he may feel that this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant had a pattern of 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 service was marred by the award of one retention warning, three nonjudicial punishment s (NJP) , and one Summary Courts-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article s 86 (Unauthorized Absence) and Article 92 (Insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer). An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

Issue 2: ( ). 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 proclaims he has not been in any trouble with the law and has been an honest, reliable tax paying citizen as proof of his post service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record, documentation of educational pursuits, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board found that the Applicant's undocumented claims of good post service conduct 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)     19900202 - 19900318              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19900319      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 19930 924
Length of Service : 3 Yrs 6 Mths 6 D ys     Lost Time : 110 Days UA: 55 Days Confine d : 65
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 57          MOS: 0811 Highest Rank:
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):     
3.7 ( 6 ) / 3.3 ( 6 )     Fitness reports :
Awards and Decorations (
per DD 214): Rifle , NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL

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

19920226:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence.
         Awarded - FOP ($200.00) for (1 month); Restr for (14 days); Extra duties (14 days).


19920712:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized Absence.
         Awarded - FOP ($205.00) for
(1 months); Restr for (14 days); Extra duties (14 days).

19921214:        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for Unauthorized absence .

19930625:        SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 (4 specs) – Unauthorized absence, Art. 91 – Insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer, Art. 92 – Dereliction of duty .
         Awarded - RIR (
E-1 ); Confinement ( 30 days).

19930804:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86- Unauthorized Absence.
         Awarded - Restr for
(14 days); Extra duties (14 days).

Discharge Process

Date Notified:   19930805
Basis for Discharge:
     DUE TO:
        
DUE TO:
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:
                 19930811
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      

         Obtain Copies of Documents               

         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        

         Administrative Board                      



Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 19930813 )
SJA review (date):      
( 19930910 )
Separation Authority (date):    
CG, 1 st MARDIV ( 19930914 )
Basis for discharge directed:  
DUE TO:
Characterization directed:     

Date Applicant Discharged:      
19930924






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 P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95.

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 .


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 | ND0700447

    Original file (ND0700447.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 discharge and characterization of service. 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 errors on the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700570

    Original file (MD0700570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:None submitted. 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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19930312 - 19940123Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19940124Years Contracted:; Extension:...

  • 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). ...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700775

    Original file (ND0700775.doc) 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 five retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (unauthorized Absence), Article 92 (Dereliction of Duty), Article 121 (Larceny), and Article 134 (Unlawful Entry). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700394

    Original file (ND0700394.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: “ 02JAN2000-04JAN2000 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Awarded - Restr for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700265

    Original file (MD0700265.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    19930423: NJP imposed and suspended on 19930409 for a period of 6 months vacated.19930803: CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 19930824 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19930823) SJA review (date): (19930830) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 1 ST Marine Division (19930910) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO: Characterization directed: Date...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700261

    Original file (MD0700261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Date Notified: 19930428Basis for Discharge: DUE TO Least Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:19930428Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19930428) SJA review (date): (19930518) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, 2D MARINE DIVISION(19930519) Basis for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700367

    Original file (ND0700367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 retention warnings, 6 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct towards a master chief petty officer), 92 (failure to obey written regulation), 95 (resistance), 112 (drunk on duty), 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance) and 134 (unlawful entry) of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700780

    Original file (ND0700780.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 and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge. 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...