Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701056
Original file (MD0701056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-PFC, USMC
MD07-01056
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070724        Characterization Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE
Narrative Reason: MINOR DISCIPLINARY INFRACTION       Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.2      

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlistment code change .
                            2. Inequitable punishment for misconduct committed.
                           3. Post service.

Decision

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

Date: 20 080110                   Location: Washington D.C.         Representation :

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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2 (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 multiple acts of misconduct. The 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 service was marred by two discharge warnings and three nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Article(s) 86, 92, and 134. Additionally, the Applicant was deemed a alcohol treatment failure for a DUI while in alcohol rehabilitation. A v iolation of UCMJ Article 92 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate.

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 limited documentation of post-service accomplishments . 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 and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of an alcohol free lifestyle, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the Applicant ’s post service conduct did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

The discharge paperwork was not found in the record. However, t he 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 overturn the discharge based on any impropriety. 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

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 ”
         “ MISCONDUCT ”

 The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Summary of Service

 Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19951127 - 19960122                   
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment:   19960123      Years Contracted : 4 ; Extension:      Date of Discharge: 19980923      
Length of Service : 02 Yrs   08 Mths   01 d ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 1 9     AFQT: 33          MOS: 0331      Highest Rank: LCPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      4.1 ( 9 ) / 4.0 ( 9 )
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): SSDR, RIFLE MM

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

 19961121 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92, 134; underage drinking and drunk and disorderly.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 234 ) for ( 1 months); Restr for ( 14 days); Extra duties ( 14 days).

 19970127 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for deficiencies in failure to follow orders and regulations. Discharge warning issued.

19980521 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for deficiencies specifically pattern of misconduct. Discharge warning issued.
19980602 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 134 .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 266 ) for ( 1 month ) ; Restr for ( 14 days); Extra duties ( 14 days).

 19980619 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 and 92 .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 519 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days).

 19980819:        VA statement of understanding: Evaluated by a Medical Officer and diagnosed as alcohol dependent.


Discharge Process

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

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

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
SJA review (date):      
Separation Authority (date):    
Basis for discharge directed:  
Characterization directed:    
Date Applicant Discharged:       19980923      

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 2001.

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 .



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 | ND0700842

    Original file (ND0700842.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    With no documentation submitted by the Applicant that may have mitigated his misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge, the Board determined and upgrade was 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...

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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...

  • 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...

  • 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 | MD0701018

    Original file (MD0701018.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 three retention warnings and four nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order), Article 134 (Soliciting another to commit an offense), and Article 134 (Altering a base pass). Medical/Service Record Entries Related to...

  • 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 | MD0700909

    Original file (MD0700909.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) 19991118 - 19991128 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19991129 Years Contracted: 4; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20020607Length of Service: 02 Yrs 06 Mths08 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...