Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801649
Original file (MD0801649.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:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20000621 - 20000723                Active: 20000724 - 20040420

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20040421     Period of E nlistment : Years Months     Date of Discharge: 20061120
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 00 D ay s       Education Level:        Age at Enlistment:
AFQT: 43          MOS: 0621         Highest Rank:    Fitness R eports:
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions):       ( ) / ( )
 Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle , , , , (2) , (2) , NUC , CoC , MM

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP :
- 20050225 : Art icle 86 ( UA, a bsent from appointed place of duty at 0730, 20050208 until 1200, 20050215 without
authorization)
Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation; d isobeyed a lawful order from Staff Sergeant M . on
20050208, which was to report to the parking lot of building 901 to commence CBC training)
 Awarded : , , Susp ended:

- 20060602 : Article 86 (U A, a bsen t by failing to report for scheduled appointment on 20060421)
 Art icle 90 (Willfully disobeying a Superior Commission Officer on 20060410)
Art icle 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation on 2 0060410 by operating a vehicle while impaired from
alcohol and drinking 8 hours prior to reporting for duty)
Article 95 (Resistance, flight, breach of arrest and escape)
 Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle on 20060410)
 Article 128 (Assault)
Awarded : , Susp ended:

S CM : SPCM: CC:

6105 Counseling ’s :
- 20040615 : For failing to shave on 20040608.
- 20050228 : For absent from appointed place of duty without authorization from his command .
- 20051220 : For physically assaulting your spouse in a poor attempt to solve an argument on 20051118.
- 20060606 : For minor infractions of the UCMJ.
- 20060911 : For violation of Article 86 (3 specifications) of the UCMJ in that you w ere not at your appointed place of
duty (Intensive Addictions Services, Malcolm Grow Medical Center, Andrew Air Force Base, MD) from :
        - 0700-1600 on 20060827
         - 0700-1600, 20060828 , and
        - 0700-1600, 20060829
- 20060911 : For my discharge from Level II alcohol treatment on 20060831 as a treatment failure. This was a result
of being UA for three days and consuming alcohol while going through the program.

6105 Counseling’s (cont) :

- 20060921 : For pattern of misconduct.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 20000724 UNTIL 20040420 ”

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 of the UCMJ, Article s 90, 92, 111, and 128.




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Employment opportunity .
Decision


 Date: 20 08 1113             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 , , regarding .

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 seven retention warnings and for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Article 86 (UA), Article 90 (Willfully disobeying a Superior Commission Officer), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation ), Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle), and Article 128 (Assault). These violations are considered serious offenses, punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and up to imprisonment if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge for these violations but opted instead for an administrative discharge. Additionally, it was noted the Applicant was an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure due to his being UA form the treatment center for 3 days and continuing to drink alcohol during his rehabilitation.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides 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 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. Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record ; marriage and children’s birth certificate (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service ; 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; and documentation of a drug free lifestyle. 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 provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. 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 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, 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 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900526

    Original file (ND0900526.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate for the violations committed and an upgrade based on a claim he was unable to complete alcohol treatment 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001803

    Original file (ND1001803.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101093

    Original file (ND1101093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300496

    Original file (MD1300496.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the records and documentation submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate his misconduct, and clemency is not warranted on this issue. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501206

    Original file (ND0501206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “receive VA Benefits.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 920908: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.920911: Applicant surrendered on board USS NIMITZ (CVN 68), at 0730 on 920911 (4...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101081

    Original file (MD1101081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.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 could have...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902342

    Original file (MD0902342.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After consideration of all available documentation to include the Applicant’s enlistment waiver for self-admitted drug use (marijuana use, 1 time), the lack of appeal requests or rebuttal statements by the Applicant, and the decision to waive his right to an administrative separation board, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of government affairs and found the Applicant did not provide sufficient, credible evidence to the contrary.Issue 4:(Decisional) () . The Applicant should be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900829

    Original file (ND0900829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, relief is denied.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Former ser Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, theBoard 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801511

    Original file (ND0801511.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from 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.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant only provided a letter from his Congressmen dated in November 2001 which is inresponse to the Applicant asking the Senator for help in...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000281

    Original file (MD1000281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s pre-service waiver; written acknowledgment of the Marine Corps Policy for Drug Abuse; his Summary of Service; Service Record Entries; Medical records; and the Verbatim Record of Trial by Special Court-Martial along with the Applicant’s contentions. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...