Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901151
Original file (MD0901151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090330
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)       20040105 - 20040516     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040517     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20080915      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 38
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle ACM

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20070120 :       Article 121 (Larceny and wrongful app ropriation)
                  Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20070626 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation)
                  Awarded: Suspended: [Extracted from supporting documents.]

- 20071125 :      Article 86 (U nauthorized absence: 2 specifications )
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct: 2 specifications )
                  Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:
- 20080605 :       Art icle 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation )
                  Sentence :

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling : 3 [Extracted from supporting documents.]
- 20070120 :       For your incident which resulted in NJP on 20070119.
- 20070802 :       Notified that you are eligible but not recommended for promotion for the month of July 2007 due to pending NJP for the loss of (1) PVS-14.
- UNDATED :        For the violation of Article 113: Misbehavior of a sentinel, which resulted in NJP on 20070228.




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. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present,
Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION .

 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. The Applicant may seek reenlistment into the Marine Corps.    
2. The Applicant is seeking higher educational opportunities.
3. The Applicant feels his discharge was unjust because he fulfilled his commitment.     

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 1022            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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 g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, and nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence: 2 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct towards a NCO by disobeying direct orders from a c orporal and s ergeant), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation: loss of a pair of night vision goggles ), Article 121 (Larceny and wrongful appropriations: took blankets belonging to Iraqi civilians for personal use by the Applicant and his fire team) . The Applicant was also the subject of a s ummary c ourt- m artial for of the UCMJ: Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation: confrontation with m ilitary p olice) . The Applicant completed his obligated service to the Marine Corps and was properly discharged.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant noted in his application that he would possibly like to reenlist into the Marine Corps again after pursuing higher education opportunities. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records (B CNR ) 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. Also, 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.

Issue 3: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because he believes his discharge was based on minor offenses. Although the Applicant believes his misconduct incidents were minor in nature, the command opined differently and took appropriate action in order to mainta in good order and discipline within the unit. Having received three retention warnings, three NJP’s and a SCM in his last 18 months of service, the NDRB opined that the Applicant could have easily been involuntarily discharged with a more unfavo rable characterization of service than he received. For the edification of the Applicant, w hen a service member reaches his end of active service, the characterization of service is based on his average proficiency and conduct markings durin g an enlistment. Per the s tandards of performance and condu ct as determined by MCO P1610.7 series, Performance Evaluation System , MCO P1070.12 series, Individual Records Administration Manual (IRAM), and customs of the service form the primary basis for determining characterization of service. Minimum acceptable average proficiency and conduct markings durin g an enlistment are 3.0 and 4.0 respectively. Failure of a Marine to achieve either of these standards is evidence of significant negative aspects, outweighing all but the most meritorious military records. Marines who do not achieve these standards should not receive an honorable discharge. The NDRB determined that the characterization of service was warranted —primarily due to the Applicant’s misconduct in his last 18 months in the Marine Corps. 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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. 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 Additio nal Reviews , Employment/Educational Opportunities, Reenlistment/RE-code and Post-Service Conduct .




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 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000822

    Original file (MD1000822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant completed his required active service and was separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) due to substandard conduct marks. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901155

    Original file (MD0901155.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 his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900209

    Original file (MD0900209.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board applauds the Applicant’s service to his country, but has determined the characterization, General (Under Honorable Conditions), was an appropriate discharge based on a full review of his record of service. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002045

    Original file (MD1002045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Therefore, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 remains eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901598

    Original file (MD0901598.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901570

    Original file (MD0901570.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1002042

    Original file (MD1002042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s proficiency and conduct (Pro/Con) marks of 4.1/3.9, command separated her with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service following completion of her required active service. The Applicant could have provided documentation as specified 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901502

    Original file (MD0901502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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 remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901599

    Original file (MD0901599.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s characterization of service shall be upgraded to Honorable. 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 COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002020

    Original file (MD1002020.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Based on the Applicant’s proficiency and conduct (Pro/Con) marks of 3.8/3.5, command discharged him with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service when he completed his required active service. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...