Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900400
Original file (MD0900400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20081201
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)       20030506 - 20030728     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20030729     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20071001      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 03 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 53
MOS: 6113
Proficiency/Conduct
M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle CoA

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20050618 :      Article 111 ( Drunk driving)
                  Awarded: Suspended:

- 20051213 :      Article 86 ( U A) 2005 1127 20051128 (1 day )
         Article 91 (Disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer)
         Article 92 (Disobeyed a direct order from SNCO)
                  Awarded: Suspended:

- 20060113 :      Article 86 (Unauthorized absence )
         Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation - possessing and consuming alcohol), 2 specifications)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20070618 :      Article 111 ( Drunk driving )
         Article 134 (Disorderly conduct - drunkenness)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:
- 20070827 :      Article 112 (Drunk on duty)
         Article 134 (Breaking restriction), 5 specifications
         Sentence: (20070720-20070729 (10 days))
         CA Action: 20070828 Approved and ordered executed.

SPCM: CC:



Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20050620 :       For misconduct, specifically my recent NJP for violation of Article 111 held on 20050618.

- 20050718 :      For violation of Article 86, in specific, on 20050713, you failed to report to your appointed place of duty, to wit Flight Line at the designated time of 0645. At 0700 you were found in your room asleep by SSgt B . and smelled of alcohol.

- 20051213 :      For inappropriate behavior and conduct in relation to the alcohol related event during the Thanksgiving 1996, specifically, the reported incident of running naked through the barracks (streaking). This occurred as a result of losing a bet involving a drinking game. Engaging in such activities that cause you to lose control of your better judgment and subsequently participate in activities of this nature are indications of a lack of maturity as well as being contrary to “Is this stupid?” test for keeping yourself out of trouble. Such behavior cannot be allowed to continue unchecked. It is contrary to the higher standards of conduct that the public expects and the Marine Corps demands from its members.

- 20051214 :      For the NJP you received on 20051213 for disrespect to noncommissioned officer, unauthorized absence, and disobeying an order given by a SNCO.

- 20060114 :      For your conduct, this resulted in a NJP on 20060113 for unauthorized absence and failure to obey an order or regulation.

- 20070911 :      For your conduct, this resulted in a Summary Court Martial on 20070827 for Article 112, drunk on duty and four specifications of Article 134, breaking restriction. On 20070708, you were found drunk on duty by consuming alcohol while on restriction. On 20070709, breaking restriction, by being 40 minutes late to muster. On another occasion on 20070616, breaking restriction, by failing to report for muster and having been restricted to the limits of the appropriate barracks, breaking restriction, by being outside of your barracks room while not on duty.

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 Representat ion :   From Congress member :

Other Documentation :

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 86 (U A ) ; Article 91 (Disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer) ; Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) ; Article 111 (Drunken operation of a vehicle) ; Article 112 (Drunk on duty) ; Article 134 (Disorderly conduct , drunkenness and b reaking restriction) , 2 specifications .


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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Service benefits .
2.
Record of service .

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0423            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 .

: ( ) . T he Applicant did not identify any Issues upon which the Board can consider to recharacterize his discharge. However, the Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. 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 is marred by six retention warnings, four NJP’s and a S CM for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (U A); Article 91 (Disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer) ; Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) ; Article 111 (Drunken operation of a vehicle) ; Article 112 (Drunk on duty) ; Article 134 (Disorderly conduct , drunkenness and b reaking restriction) , 2 specifications . These are considered serious offenses which could have resulted in a punitive discharge if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court martial. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The Applicant only provided service-related medical documents as evidence on his behalf. The Board determined this documentation was not suffi cient to warrant an upgrade and the awarded discharge was appropriate.

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 there was no post service documentation provided . 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. Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. There are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.


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, 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 | MD0801960

    Original file (MD0801960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he deserves better than a “Bad Conduct” discharge after serving many years in the Marine Corps and taking part in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801866

    Original file (ND0801866.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Record of service. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801914

    Original file (MD0801914.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate for the numerous NJP’s and UCMJ violations involved and an upgrade based on youth and immaturity 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500591

    Original file (ND1500591.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002115

    Original file (MD1002115.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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300958

    Original file (MD1300958.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD13-00958 a ~ ' ,ex-PFC, USMC CURRENT DISCHARGE AND APPLICANT *§ REQUEST Application Received: 20130314 Characterization of Service Received: (corrected) UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS Narrative Reason for Discharge: (per DD 214) MISCONDUCT Authority for Discharge: (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5 [DRUGS] Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400859

    Original file (MD1400859.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found clemency was not warranted. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901476

    Original file (ND0901476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support clemency based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee clemency.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501558

    Original file (ND0501558.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was discharged from the Navy under a general (under honorable conditions) discharge characterization as a result of “the commission of a serious offense”. The command has provided various forms of assistance and help for his alcohol problems; however, AA N_ (Applicant) continues to have alcohol related incidents.” PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20040820 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense...