Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900072
Original file (MD0900072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081009
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)    20000615 - 20000620     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20000621      Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20030117       H ighest Rank:
Length of Service: Years Months 27 D ays
Education Level:         AFQT: 63
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )   Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle

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

Retention Warning Counseling:

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:
DD 214:         Service/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 Congress member:

Other Documentation:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1600.19F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, 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 .



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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Discharge unfair - Record of service.
2. Post service conduct.

Decision

 Date: 2009 326 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation : Veteran Services (Dakota Cnty)
By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
Discussion

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was unfair because his record of service in the Marine Corps was exemplary as noted in his proficiency/conduct reports and his discharge was partially based on comments by supervisors who spent little or no time with him. 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 was seen as early as 5 January 2001 by the Mental Health Staff for sleep change, decrease in concentration and energy, suicidal ideations and feelings of hopelessness. The Applicant was put on Wellbutrin (he stopped taking shortly after starting) and Ambien for his condition and scheduled for follow-ups, which he attended. On 1 February 2001, the diagnosis suggests the Applicant has ADHD with borderline personality disorder and should be subject to a fraudulent enlistment. No discharge, disciplinary, or retention warning action was taken by the command at this time.

On 16 February 2001, the Applicant was seen by a Primary Care Manager; in their assessment they state the Applicant reports frequent and/or excessive alcohol consumption. However, based on the risk factor, they indicated “NO” for potential alcohol abuse. On 22 August 2001, the Applicant was arrested for driving under the influence alcohol with a blood alcohol content of .27, this was following a 19 day work-up on the USS BATAAN. Again, there was no disciplinary or retention warning action taken by the command for this incident. The Applicant appears to have deployed aboard the USS BATAAN to participate in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), specifically in Afghanistan. There were no other reports of alcohol abuse or mental issues until 12 August 2002, when he was admitted to the Emergency Room with a BAC of .23 and had apparently attempted a suicide gesture with what was called a “dull K-Bar.”

The Applicant was admitted to the acute inpatient unit with close observations given his contract for safety. On 19 August 2002, the Applicant was admitted to Level III residential treatment. The Applicant’s initial response to treatment was poor. By the end of his first week in treatment he had been presented at Special Staff Intervention (SSI) for his lack of boundaries with female patients, passive aggressive approach to counseling, lack of sincerity, and minimizing his use of alcohol and other drugs. Following the SSI, the Applicant continued in his behaviors and was presented at a Patient Disposition Board (PDB) for rule violations, continued boundary issues, and a lack of investment in change. The members of the PDB retained him on a day-by-day basis, as long as he committed to make changes in his personal behavior and addressed his problems in a positive manner. Following the PDB, the Applicant continued to violate alcohol rehabilitation rules and regulations and he was subsequently discharged as an Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure (ARF) on 4 September 2002. Upon being declared an ARF, the command decided to start processing the Applicant for an administrative discharge. The Applicant was discharged from the Marine Corps on 17 January 2003 with a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization.

In response to the PTSD claim, first the military doctors determined the mental health issues existed prior to the Applicant’s entry into the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps could have discharged the Applicant from the service based on fraudulent enlistment for his failure to disclose this information. The Marine Corps service tried to help the Applicant with his abuse problems but he was unwilling to conform to the treatment provided and failed to work with his treatment providers to help himself overcome his substance addiction problems. While the NDRB commends the Applicant for serving in support of OEF, it was determined the Marine Corps exhausted all responsible options in helping the Applicant and that the diagnosis of PTSD


was not the sole reason of his behavior, as he had other mental health issues that existed prior to enlistment. The NDRB determined that the awarded discharge characterization of service was appropriate; an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . 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. 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 during Board reviews. 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 companies, or other financial institutions; attending or completion of higher education (official transcripts) 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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he provided service-related documents and post-service medical evaluations documentation as evidence on his behalf. However, to warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service 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, “General (Under 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 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, provided 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 granted 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.
Employment/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 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 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 | 2010_Marine | MD1001435

    Original file (MD1001435.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401702

    Original file (ND1401702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. She was being processed for NJP for three offenses at the same time that the command was also processing her administrative separation for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure (ARF). ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901410

    Original file (ND0901410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902520

    Original file (ND0902520.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101815

    Original file (ND1101815.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks a change in his RE Code and wants to be reinstated in the U.S. Navy with his rank restored. 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901663

    Original file (ND0901663.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101882

    Original file (ND1101882.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000788

    Original file (ND1000788.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief denied.Summary: After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000183

    Original file (ND1000183.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101365

    Original file (ND1101365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends that based on her record of service she deserves anHonorable discharge.2. 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...