Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900787
Original file (MD0900787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
Docket No. MD09-00787

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090219
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)       20050525 - 20050921     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20050922     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20070823      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 11 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
MOS: 8911
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): 3.4 ( NFIR ) / 2.7 ( NFIR )      Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA : 20060712-20060808 (28 days); 20060811-20070605 (298 days)
CO NF: 20070605-20070606 (2 days – In Hands of Civilian Authorities (IHCA) )

NJP:
- 20070801 :      Article 86 (U nauthorized absence : 298 days – apprehended )
                  Awarded : Susp ended:


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 Representat ion :   From Congress member :

Other Documentation :




Docket No. MD09-00787

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), 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 (Unauthorized absence)

Docket No. MD09-00787


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Seeks service benefits.
2. The Applicant believes his discharge was beyond his control and was unjust and unfair.

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 0821            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.

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 evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UC MJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 298 days, which ended in his apprehension by civilian authorities). Thi s is considered a serious offense which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement 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. When notified for a dministrative s eparation p rocessing, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, submit a wri tten statement and request an a dministrative b oard.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants service benefits. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.

Issue 2 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was beyond his control and was unjust and unfair. The Applicant states that he was hazed by Marines in his unit, which was confirmed by the NDRB . He states that this is the reason he went into an unauthorized absence (UA) status. The Applicant went into a UA status from 12 July 2006 to 8 August 2006 (28 days) and was not punished for that period . B ut when he went into a UA status again from 11 August 2006 to 5 June 2007 (298 days), in which he was apprehended by civilian authorities, the Marine Corps was compelled to discipline him. If the Applicant hadn’t been picked-up by civilian authorities, he would likely still be in a deserter status. The UCMJ exists to protect or punish service members as appropriate; the Marines who hazed the Applicant were all punished through c ourt- m artial. Therefore, the Applicant’s claim that he deserted due to the hazing is without merit. The Applicant also claim ed that he was harass ed , thr eatened and even beat-down by a Marine Corps o fficer . U nfortunately , despite being directed through NDRB correspondence to provide thorough documentation on any allegations, he provided no documentation /s ubstantiat ion regarding this allegation . The NDRB opined that even if this allegation was proven, such an assault would not justify the Applicant’s desertion. The NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge action and that the characterization of the Applicant’s service was pr oper as issued. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and 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 remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additi onal Reviews and Post-Service Conduct .

Docket No. MD09-00787

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant
Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (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; attendance at 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 in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 20374-502 3

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902511

    Original file (MD0902511.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His command accepted his SILT request and administratively processed him for separation.Issue 1: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to reenlist in the Marine Corps. As the NDRB had determined relief is warranted based on the Applicant's previous issues, no further consideration on this issue is required.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 the discharge was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902511A

    Original file (MD0902511A.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His command accepted his SILT request and administratively processed him for separation.Issue 1: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to reenlist in the Marine Corps. As the NDRB had determined relief is warranted based on the Applicant's previous issues, no further consideration on this issue is required.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 the discharge was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300917

    Original file (MD1300917.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with section 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution.The Applicant’s service record documents completion of two deployments to Iraq conducting combat operations in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901417

    Original file (MD0901417.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. On 25 October 2008, the Separation Authority approved the command's recommendation for separation and directed the Applicant be discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct due to drug abuse pursuant to paragraph 6210.5 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual. The NDRB...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300631

    Original file (MD1300631.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant, however, was not taken to a Special Court-Martial but was administratively separated after requesting separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT). The Applicant could have provided additional documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300662

    Original file (MD1300662.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301440

    Original file (MD1301440.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/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100291

    Original file (MD1100291.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200529

    Original file (MD1200529.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900101

    Original file (ND0900101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board rejects the Applicant’s claim he did not have formal training on hazing as being without merit and insufficient to warrant an upgrade. Issue 4:() .The Applicant contends his post service conduct warrants an upgrade. 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...