Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901211
Original file (MD0901211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090403
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)       20020715 - 20030630     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030701     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20080630      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 90
MOS: 6212
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle LoA (2) MM

Periods of CONF :

NJP: :

- 20060707 :       Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation), 2 specifications
        
Awarded : Susp ended:

-
20060813 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey an order)
         Article 8
6 (UA 1100-1230, 20060809)
        
Awarded : Susp ended:

-
20070105 :       Article 92 (Wrongfully possess hard alcohol in barracks)
         Awarded:
Suspended:

-
20080610 :      Article 91 (Disrespectful to the DNCO)
         Article
92 (Disobeyed orders)
         Article 121 (Caught in possession of several tools, military property)
        
Awarded : Susp ended
SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20060707 :       For violation of Article 92 (2 counts). Specifically, on 20060628 while on liberty in Jebel Ali, I disobeyed direct orders from my Commanding Officer not to drink out in town past 2100 and from my SNCOIC to check out with a fellow Marine from the command as a liberty buddy.

- 20060813 :       For violation of Article 92 and 86. Specifically on 20060809 I failed to muster in accordance with my muster and restraint record, and did absent myself from my appointed place of duty without authorization.

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.       Nondecisional issue . Would like to pursue his education.
2.       Decisional issue . Requests p ost-service conduct consideration .

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 1119        Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of
the Narrative Reason shall COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE .

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 warning
, for o f the following Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ ) articles : Article
92
( Failure to obey an order or regulation), 2 specifications ; Article 92 (Failure to obey an order) ; Article 8 6 (UA 1100-1230
20060809) ; Article 92 ( Wrongfully possess ing hard alcohol in barracks) ; A rticle 91 (Disrespectful to the DNCO) ; Article 92
(Disobeyed orders) ; and Article 121 (Caught in possession of several tools, military property).

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to go to school to pursue his professional goals. 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.

Issu e 2: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant states he realizes his military service was less than honorable and he has made an effort in the past nine months to get his life back on track. Per MCOP1900.16F ( the Marine Corps Separations and Retirement Manual ) , a Marine may be awarded a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge if a member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweigh positive aspects of the member’s military record. Upon separation, a member’s average PRO/CON marks must be equal to or greater than 3.0 /proficiency and 4.0 /conduct to be awarded a n Honorable discharge. The Applicant’s 5 - year enlistment PRO/CON marks averages were 4.1 and 3.7 respectively. Based on these marks and the four NJP s within his enlistment period, the command was justified in award ing the Applicant a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge.

Besides the Applicant's statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any additional documentation and evidence on his behalf to support a post-service conduct review. The Applicant's statements alone, without sufficient documentary evidence, are not enough to form a basis of relief. On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiate s or relate s directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). Additionally, upon receipt of the Applicant's DD Form 293, the NDRB mails an acceptance letter that includes the Information Concerning Review Procedures , which discusses the submission of additional documents in paragraph 3, Submission of Evidence , and in the last section on page 4, Information Pertaining to a Review Based Upon Post-Service Conduct . The Applicant should have provide d documentation which could include but is not limited to: letters of personal references and verifiable employment record /letter of recommendation from his employers; evidence of a drug - free life style (completion of rehab/proof he atten ded AA meetings) ; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities , evidence of financial stability (home ownership/home rental history, credit card payments); documentation of community /church service and if married, a marriage certificate. The Applicant should be aware that provision of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on case-by-case basis.

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, 30 June 2008 . The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201788

    Original file (ND1201788.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00183

    Original file (MD04-00183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00183 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031107. So, I leave it in your hands to help me!” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None HON Inactive: USMCR (J) 870519 - 871116 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500352

    Original file (MD1500352.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer), Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 2 specifications), and Article (General article, Drunk and disorderly in his conduct towards a SSgt (SDO) and Sgt (DNCO); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002227

    Original file (MD1002227.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 | MD1001917

    Original file (MD1001917.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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301519

    Original file (MD1301519.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his performance warrants consideration for a change to Honorable or Uncharacterized.During the Applicant’s less than two years of service, he received two retention warnings and was found guilty at three NJPs and a Summary Court-Martial of violating several UCMJ articles. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201071

    Original file (MD1201071.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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101453

    Original file (ND1101453.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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900893

    Original file (ND0900893.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence “which substantiate or relate directly to your issues in Item 6.” (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900168

    Original file (MD0900168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of...