Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800805
Original file (MD0800805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080205
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: Misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19970418 - 19970721              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19970722      Period of E nlistment : Years Months    Date of Discharge: 19990823
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 02 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 34
MOS: 0311         Highest Rank: Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( )/ ( )
 Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle KCM W/BRONZE STAR

Periods of CONF : 19990629-19990712 (14 days in Onslow County Jail ),
19990806-19990819 (14 days).

NJPs :    
19981125 : Art icle 123a (Made a check to the Disbursing Office with insufficient funds for payment).
A warded - . Susp - . Susp vacated 19990430.
19990430 : Art icle 123a (Made twelve (12) checks to Disbursing Office in the amount of $456.60 with insufficient
funds for payment).
Awarded - . Susp - .

19990601 : Art icle 92 (Fail to obey an order by having visitors while on restriction).
Art icle 121 (Steal calling card services, a value of $447.62).
 Art icle 134 (Br oke restriction) , 2 specificat i ons .
 Sentence - (19990601-19990624 (24 days)) .
 CA Action (19991015) : The specifications to which there were findings of guilt stated under the UCMJ
except that the specifications under charge II (larceny) failed to state an offense. I disapprove the finding
of guilty to charge II (larceny) and it specification, and reassess the sentence. Only so much of the
sentence as provides for confinement for 30 days and forfeiture of 439.00 pay per month for 1 month is
approved and ordered executed.

SPCMs:  

CC:      

6105 Counseling :         1
19980623 :         For display of poor decision making skills and demonstrates a lack of responsibility. PFC knowingly displayed poor judgment.
19980819 :         For poor decision making and lack of responsibility.
19990415 :         For multiple infractions of the UCMJ resulting in several NJP proceedings.

Pending charges:                  Four criminal summonses in Onslow County for worthless checks and two speeding tickets.


Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 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)



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Applicant feels his discharge should be based on his Medical problems vice disciplinary reasons.
2. Correction to DD214 .

Decision


 Date : 20 08 0807             Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT ( MINOR DISCIPLINARY INFRACTIONS ) .
Discussion

 Issue 1 : ( ) . The Applicant contends his problems may be attributed to his diagnosis of depression and as a result he should have been given a medical discharge vice an administrative discharge for Misconduct . I n 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. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by three retention counseling in June 1998, August 1998 and April 1999 respectively for poor decision making skills, poor judgment and multiple infractions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was the subject of two non-judicial punishments and a Summary Court-Martial in Nov 1998, April 1999 and June 1999, respectively for violations of Articles 92, 121, 123a and 134, which are considered serious offenses punishable by a bad conduct or d ishonorable discharge and up to imprisonment if adjudicated as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administration separation.

The Applicant was hospitalized at Camp LeJeune Naval Hospital on 26 July 1999 for suicidal ideation ( vague gesture) while intoxicated. The Applicant claims he was rap ed while in the Onslow County Jail (mid-Jul 1999) , approximately ten days before his hospitalization for depression. The Applicant presents no evidence to support his claim and a review of the medical records indicates t he examining physician found no evidence of physical trauma that would normally be associated with a male on male rape . The Applicant’s medical records did not show he underwent counseling for the alleged rape. The Applicant’s final diagnosis was Alcohol Abuse, with personality disorder and anti-social behavior : h e was deemed unsuitable for continued military service. At the time of his hospitalization, the Applicant was already being processed for the misconduct administrative separation . While he may feel his depression was the underlying cause of his misconduct, t he evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions based on depression as the result of being raped . It should also be noted the Applicant’s disciplinary infractions began prior to his incarceration in Onslow County Jail. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

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

Issue 2: (Equity). The Applicants asks that his Navy Unit Commendation Kosovo Campaign Medal (KC) with bronze star be added to his DD 214 via the issuance of a DD 215 correction. His Service Records show that the DD215 has already been issued.










Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective
31 January 1997 until 31 August 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 s 92, 121, 123a and 134 .

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 or is referred to a court-martial fo r 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 other medical related reasons. ” 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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 | 2008_Marine | MD0800533

    Original file (MD0800533.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ]6105 Counseling: 19890414:For failure to follow instructions, and failure to adhere to rules and regulations.19890630:For substandard performance and conduct in particular, writing checks with insufficient funds in your account and poor judgment.19910228:For financial irresponsibility based on your conviction after appearing in the Onslow County Court on 19910225 for writing two worthless checks totaling $29.02 in which you were found guilty Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900237

    Original file (MD0900237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing the Applicants record of service and his post service efforts since his discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board has determined his post service efforts were sufficient enough to warrant an upgrade to “General (Under Honorable Conditions).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, theBoard found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801070

    Original file (MD0801070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.Discussion :().The Applicant implies he was not responsible for his behavior since he was suffering from both Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression at the time of his misconduct. 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801763

    Original file (MD0801763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant stated his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in almost three years of service. In the absence of collaborating evidence, the Board determined the narrative reason was appropriate and a change would be inappropriate.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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00701

    Original file (MD03-00701.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. This action was the basis for his administrative separation due to the commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00898

    Original file (MD04-00898.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801715

    Original file (ND0801715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The narrative reason for discharge shall remain the same.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800982

    Original file (ND0800982.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214The NDRB did note...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801156

    Original file (MD0801156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: or UNCHARACTERIZEDNarrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19991208 - 19991228Active:19991229 - 20031003 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20031004Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20061123Length of Service: Years Month20 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT:38MOS: 0431Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):()/()Awards and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00303

    Original file (MD02-00303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00303 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020122, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. 920617: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reasons...