Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801597
Original file (MD0801597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080728
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  N arrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20010224 - 20010827                Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010828     Period of E nlistment : Years Months     Date of Discharge: 20021001
Length of Service : Y ea r M on th 03 D a ys          Education Level: (DNG)   Age at Enlistment:
AFQT: 57          MOS: 3531         Highest Rank:    Fitness R eports:
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions):       ( ) / ( )
 Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF : SCM: SPCM: CC:

NJP :
- 20020307 : Art icle 86 (U A, 1 day)
Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20020426 : Art icle 86 (U A, 1 day)
Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order not to consume alcohol)
 Article 107 (False official statement to NCO)
 Article 111 (DUI)
Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20020726 : Art icle 86 (UA, absence from formation ) , 2 specifications
          Awarded : Susp ended:

6105 Counseling :
- 20020117 : For underage drinking.
- 20020306 : For unauthorized absence.

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:

         - Letter dated 17 July 2008 from Representative D. B., U. S. House of Representatives.

Other Documentation (Describe) :


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Desires to reenlist in the Army.
2. Youth and immaturity.
3. Post s ervice conduct.

Decision


 Date: 20 08 1 030             Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT) .
Discussion

 Issue 1: This is either an Issue which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or one 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 Reenlistment/RE Code s , regarding this Issue.
Issue 2: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED . The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity were the basis for his misconduct. 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 two retention warnings for underage drinking and UA , and three NJP’s for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (UA), Article 92 (Failure to obey order/regulation), Article 107 (False official statement), and Article 111 (DUI). Violations of Articles 92, 107 and 111 are considered serious offenses, punishable by a punitive discharge and up to five years imprisonment if adjud icated and awarded as part of a sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a pun i tive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge. While he may feel his youth and immaturity was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his repeated willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further military service. The record does not support the Applicant’s claim was caused by youth or immaturity.

The Applicant's abuse of alcohol appears to be the root cause for his inability to adhere to USMC standards of conduct. He was diagnosed as Alcohol Dependent on 5 August, 2002, but refused treatment. Unfortunate as his decisions were at that point in his life, the evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The Applicant has requested an upgrade to his characterization to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”. A “ General (Under Honorable Conditions) ” discharge 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. An “ Under Other than Honorable Conditions ” discharge is appropriate when the basis for separation is commission or omission of an act that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service member . The Board acknowledges the Applicant’s misconduct represents a significant departure of the conduct expected from a U. S. Marine and determined the awarded characterization was appropriate; an upgrade or change would be inappropriate.

Issue 3: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED . The Applicant states he is now a married man with four children. H e has been studying and training to provide a better future for his family. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered. The key word here is "Outstanding". The Board is looking for actions that go beyond simply daily living. Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record ; documentation of community or church service ; marriage and children’s birth certificates; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities ; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit


card company’s, or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements. 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.

Although the Applicant states he has matured and changed, he did not provide a personal statement, supporting documentation of post service accomplishments or character witness statements to support his request for an upgrade. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. 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 w ithout having the necessary post service documentation to review, 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 Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

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 of the UCMJ, Article 92, 107 and 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 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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700773

    Original file (ND0700773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warnings, the award of two nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer), Article 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation), Article 107 (False official statement), Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle), Article 134 ( Drunkenness), Article 134 (False or unauthorized pass...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801152

    Original file (MD0801152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There was no evidence in the record, nor was any submitted by the Applicant, documenting he was not responsible for his actions or that the misconduct should be excused based on youth and immaturity. Again, 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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801003

    Original file (ND0801003.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) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801945

    Original file (MD0801945.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade based on youth and immaturity would be inappropriateThe NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900310

    Original file (ND0900310.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and 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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801491

    Original file (MD0801491.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 86, 92, 107, 111, and 112A. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801051

    Original file (ND0801051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined clemency was not warranted and 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: 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001320

    Original file (MD1001320.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 . ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301178

    Original file (MD1301178.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 Applicant is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900309

    Original file (ND0900309.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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicant DD Form 293 and personal letter, no documentation was provided for review. Should the Applicant obtain additional...