Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901521
Original file (MD0901521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090512
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)       20010802 - 20020708     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020709     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050624      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 16 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 67
MOS: 0121
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle CoA MM

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20030925 :      Article 92 ( Failure to obey lawful order: 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20041103 :      Article 91 (Disrespectful in language toward C hief P etty O fficer )
         Article 92 (Fail ure to obey lawful general order by wrongfully consuming alcohol)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20050503 :      Article 92 (Derelict in the performance of duty by willfully and wrongfully reported to disbursing that Pvt S_ rated BAH without dependants)
          Article 134 ( Bribery and graft: wrongfully ask ed from Marine , the sum of $2,000.00, as compensation for services in relati on to the over payment of BAH: 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended:


SCM: SPCM: CC:


Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20030929 :       For failure to obey lawful order by wrongfully leaving Camp Foster without sign ing out in liberty log book and wrongfully consuming alcohol under the age of 21.
- 20041110 :       For minor in possession and disrespect to a Chief Petty Officer.
- 20050503 :       For dereliction of duty and bribery.




Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

          Type of Separation, should read: “ DISCHARGED ”
         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3 ”
         “ HKA1 ”
         “ MISCONDUCT ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.
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 :      (DeVry transcripts)


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 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant believes his misconduct was due to youth and immaturity.
2. The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.   

Decision

 Date: 20 10 0128            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 g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 (Disrespectful in language toward C hief P etty O fficer by saying to him on various occa s ions: “F_ you man ” ) , Article 92 ( Failure to obey lawful order: 2 specifications : w rongfully leaving Camp Foster without signing out of the liberty log book and w rongfully consuming alcohol under the legal age of 21 ) , Article 92 (Derelict in the performance of duty by willfully and wrongfully report ing to disbursing that Private S_ rated BAH without dependants) and Article 134 ( Bribery and graft: w rongfully ask ing from a P rivate , the sum of $2,000.00, as compensation for services in relati on to the over payment of BAH - 2 specifications ). Based on the serious offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separa tion. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an a dministrative b oard.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was due to youth and immaturity and now that he is older, he sees the error of his ways. The NDRB determined that the Applicant's youth or age was no t a mitigating factor in his misconduct. The NDRB opined that the Applicant wrongfully used his position as a personnel administrator to receive compensation in recognition of services rendered. The NDRB det ermined that this was a gross violation of integrity and trust. The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service in order to maintain good order and discipline – his offenses met this standard . Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service cond uct is worthy of consideration. The Applicant provided verified documentation (transcripts) that he is pursuing higher education. However, t o warrant upgrade consideration, the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the a ddendum , with the understanding that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additio nal Reviews 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 Disable d American 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 their 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901531

    Original file (MD0901531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct and the awarded characterization of discharge was warranted.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801139

    Original file (ND0801139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT - . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200491

    Original file (MD1200491.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During his less than three years in the Marine Corps, he received four retention warnings and was found guilty of numerous UCMJ violations at four NJPs, all of which occurred before his return from Afghanistan in January 2010. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100827

    Original file (ND1100827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is evident that this service member should not be recommended for retention in the Naval Service … .” After considering all the available evidence regarding the Applicant’s misconduct, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901089

    Original file (ND0901089.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 ofthe Applicant’sdate 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101867

    Original file (MD1101867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory.The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 29 December 2005. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300422

    Original file (MD1300422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101799

    Original file (ND1101799.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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000107

    Original file (MD1000107.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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900879

    Original file (ND0900879.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...