Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701272
Original file (MD0701272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070919
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19840523 - 19840812              Active: 19840813 - 19920627 HON         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19920628               Period of enlistment : Years Months             Date of Discharge: 19950623
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 10 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 31
MOS: 0331        Highest Rank:                     Fitness reports:
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): (3) , , , NMCOSR , KLM , JMUA , , LOA , MM (4) ,
 , CGSOSR

Periods of UA / CONF :

Nonjudicial Punishment: 1
19851002: For violations of Art 111 (Drunken Driving) Awarded: RIR to E1, FOP, RESTR, EPD Susp: None

 6105 Counseling :
19860314: For completion of Alcohol Rehab treatment.
19870722: For DWI and UA.
19890524: For DWI aboard base.   
19941227 : For frequent alcohol related incidents specifically; (1) DWI 8508 (2) DWI 8905 (3) DWI 9404.

Types of Documents Submitted

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:             From Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ CONTINUOUS ACTIVE SERVICE 19840813-19920627. ”

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Change RE Code .
2. Admin Board Recommendation was ignored .

Decision


 Date: 20 08 0516             Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE .
Discussion

 : (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. 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 , Reenlistment/RE Code, regarding .

Issue 2 (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because the Administrative discharge board voted to suspend his discharge for one year to allow the Applicant the opportunity to serve until his EAS. In the Applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considers the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. For the Applicant’s information the decision of the Administrative board is merely a recommendation to the commanding officer. The discharge authority weighs this information , in addition to the overall service record , in their final decision .

The Applicant’s record was marred by one nonjudicial punishment for violation of Article 111 (Drunken Driving) and four retention warnings. Violation of Article 111 is considered a serious offense, punishable by a punitive discharge and up to six months imprisonment upon conviction by a special or general court-martial. 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, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A . The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16D), effective 890627 until 950817, Paragraph 6209, ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE .

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 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901238

    Original file (ND0901238.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service:Inactive: USN (DEP) 20050920 - 20051024 Active: 20051025 - 20071108 HON Period of Service Under Review:Date of Appointment : 20071109Age: 25Years Contracted: Indefinite Date of Discharge: 20090331 Highest Rank : ENSLength of Service: 01 Year(s) 04Month(s) 22 Day(s) Education Level: BS Officer’s Fitness reports: Not Available Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle Pistol Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201082

    Original file (ND1201082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300980

    Original file (ND1300980.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301318

    Original file (ND1301318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s alcohol rehabilitation failure, command administratively processed for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200422

    Original file (ND1200422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants an upgrade to improve employment opportunities.2. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401647

    Original file (ND1401647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Related to Military Service: DD 214: Service/Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation: From/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201561

    Original file (ND1201561.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500278

    Original file (ND1500278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200542

    Original file (MD1200542.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant completed his service obligation, his record of service included evidence of significant negative aspects, and his average Conduct marks did not meet the requirement to issue him an Honorable characterization. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100035

    Original file (ND1100035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Board determined that the unique circumstances surrounding the misconduct warranted...