Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902078
Original file (MD0902078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090721
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)       20040312 - 20040425     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040426     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20080425      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 40
MOS: 0331
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (Iraq) (2) NMUC CoC

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20050529 :       Article 134 ( General Article – Through negligence , discharge d a MK-19 approximately 300 meters forward of his position)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20051108 :       Article 1 11 (Drunken or reckless driving on 2015, 20051104)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20060105 :       Article 134 (General Article – Break said restrictions)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20070402 :       Article 9 1 (Disrespectful in language and behavior toward SGT)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20071007 :       Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation by consuming alcohol in barracks)
         Article 91 (Disrespectful in language toward a SGT)
         Awarded : RESTR Susp ended:

- 20080318 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation , operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:
Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20040715 :       For being dropped from the MAGTF Intelligence Specialist Course for academic failure.
- 20060109 :       For breaking restriction on 20051219.
- 20061127 :       For performance and conduct.
- 20070710 :       For recent battalion NJP for violation of articles 91 and 92 of the UCMJ.
- 20080318 :       For being found guilty at Company NJP for violation of article 92, disobeying a direct order.

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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on his record of service and diagnos is of PTSD while in service.
Decision

Date: 2010 1119 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

By a vote of t he 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 (Disrespectful in language and behavior toward SGT - 2 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation - 2 specifications), Article 111 (Drunken or reckless driving) , and Article 134 (General Article - 2 specifications). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority but did exercise his rights to request an administrative board.
At the Administrative Separation Board, the Board determined, by a unanimous vote (3-0), that the preponderance of evidence supported the alleged acts or omissions in the notification and that the Applicant should be separated from the Marine Corps with a n Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization. The separating authority approved the ASB’s recommendation and properly discharged the Applicant on the last day of enlistment.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on his record of service and diagnos is of PTSD while in service. The NDRB carefully reviewed the Applicant’s service record and the circumstances that led to each and every offense and weighed them against his overall service. The NDRB was unable to retrieve the Applicant’s medical records but had enough information to conclude that he did suffer from PTSD and a TBI incident while in Iraq. Based on all the information at hand, the NDRB determined that the Applicant performed well in his two combat tours , and that his medical condition was a contributing factor concerning hi s misconduct while he was back in the United States .

Additionally, the NDRB recommends that the Applicant check with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to verify whether he rates the Purple Heart for the TBI event (WIA - Level II Concussion) that occurred on 14 August 2006. The BCNR may make the change based on current records or direct the Applicant to the appropriate Board to investigate claim. If the Applicant has documentation, it would expedite his request. Based on the overall record, the NDRB determined by a 3-2 vote that an upgrade to General (Under Honorable Conditions) would be appropriate. Relief granted.

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 Additional Reviews, Service Benefits 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 | MD0901796

    Original file (MD0901796.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specification 2: On 2 Nov 2006, UA from roll call 0715-0745.Article , (Failure to obey an order or regulation): Driving on a suspended license. The NDRB found there was insufficient evidence to determine that the Applicant was suffering from PTSD or that his mental state was a mitigating factor in his misconduct.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901240

    Original file (MD0901240.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 | MD1001852

    Original file (MD1001852.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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900263

    Original file (ND0900263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Applicantsstatement on the DD Form 293, he provided references and correspondence any additional as evidence on his behalf. The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900509

    Original file (ND0900509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. 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 lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade 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,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101695

    Original file (MD1101695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, after reviewing the Applicant’s issues, supporting documents and the evidence of record, the NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity with the Applicant’s separation and that the characterization of service, as issued, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901704

    Original file (ND0901704.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct and the awarded characterization of service 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 personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101739

    Original file (MD1101739.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    These actions established a pattern of misconduct that warranted consideration for administrative separation. As such, the NDRB determined that an upgrade in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge is not appropriate and is 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800863

    Original file (ND0800863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/ReviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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: ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100897

    Original file (MD1100897.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” 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. Reenlistment/RE-code : Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction...