Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801507
Original file (MD0801507.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080627
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) 20020604 - 20030602                Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20030603     Period of E nlistment : Years Months     Date of Discharge: 20060915
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 13 D a ys Education Level: Age at Enlistment:       
MOS: 0311 Highest Rank:        Fitness R eports: AFQT: 51
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions):       ( ) / ( )
 Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle SSDR w/1* NDSM CAR (Iraq) ICM GWOTSM GWOTEM PH

Period of CONF : 20060407-20060428 (22 days), Per DD 214

NJP :
- 20040613 : Art icle 113 (Sleeping on post 20040526)
 Article 113 (Sleeping on post 20040601)
          A warded : Susp ended:

- 20041130 : Art icle 92 (Violate a lawful order, to wit: wrongfully consuming alcohol)
          Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20051011 : Article 134 (Attempt to deceive the leadership within his platoon)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20060407 : Article 92 (Fail to obey a lawful order)
          Article 93 ( Cruel ty and Maltreat ment)
          Article 134 ( Disregard for unit cohesion conducted an unauthorized training session in BEQ room)
Awarded : . Susp ended:

S CM :
- 20051201 : Art icle 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order)
         Article 113 (Sleeping on post)
          Awarded: CONF 28 DAYS. Susp ended: CONF

6105 Counseling :
- 20051102 :       For sleeping on post ( in combat zone ) and disobeying a direct order from the Commanding Officer.
- 20060526 :       For commencement of an administrative separation package for a pattern of misconduct.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ MARCORSEPMAN Par 6210.3 ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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) :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present.

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 s of the UCMJ, Article s 92, 93, 113 and 134 .


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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Medical b enefits .
2. Record of s ervice .
Decision


 Date: 20 08 1030   Location: Washington D.C .       R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
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 , specifically the paragraph concerning , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable based on mitigating circumstances, to wit: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). 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. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by one Summary Court-martial, four NJP’s for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), 3 specifications ; Article 93 (Cruelty and maltreatment); Article 113 (Sleeping on Post), 3 specifications; Article 134 (Attempt to deceive leadership) ; and Article 134 (Hazing). These violations are considered serious offenses, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge.

The Board considered the mitigating circumstances of the Applicant and sought the advice of the Senior Medical Officer of the SECNAV Council of Review Boards. Based on his Medical Officer’s professional assessment of the circumstances and the Boards 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 determined that relief is warranted under equitable grounds even though the discharge was determined to have been otherwise equitable and proper at the time of issuance. A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Board determined the Applicant’s conduct had significant negative aspects which warranted a “General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge rather than the awarded “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” discharge and an upgrade was appropriate.


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 | MD0801413

    Original file (MD0801413.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. 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 you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900355

    Original file (MD0900355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade wouldbe inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided an upgrade...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900370

    Original file (ND0900370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Discharged while mentally ill and never received treatment or screening for bipolar disorder with psychotic features. ” 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 does...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801584

    Original file (MD0801584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801744

    Original file (ND0801744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19910820 - 19920330Active: 19920401-20051021 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20051022Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070926Length of Service: YearMonths04 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 97Highest Rank/Rate:FCC EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.33(3) Behavior:2.6(3)OTA: 3.33Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800992

    Original file (ND0800992.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As no issues were submitted by the Applicant, the Board conducted a general review of the discharge and discharge process. Therefore, relief is denied.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900638

    Original file (ND0900638.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant did not complete his enlistment and therefore his request to have his official discharge documentation reflect otherwise is without merit.The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate for the offenses committed and the narrative reason was correct as issued; an upgrade would be inappropriate. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801547

    Original file (MD0801547.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE).Discussion :().The Applicant regrets the mistakes he made while on active duty and desires to upgrade his 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. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801604

    Original file (ND0801604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant submitted a statement with his DD-293 Application claiming employment, education efforts, and participation in his church and in other community service. The Board determined the characterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801749

    Original file (ND0801749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.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:...