Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000084
Original file (MD1000084.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20091008
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)       20011129 - 20020707     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020708     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20070108      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 32
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /          Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (Iraq) (2) (Iraq) NMUC PUC-N

Lost time per DD214: 20040119-20040627 (161) [UA] ; 20040802-20040825 (24) [CONF]

NJP:
- 20060223 :       Article (Failed to obey a lawful general order, wrongfully driving without driver’s license)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM: SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20031008 :       For assignment to Body Composition Program

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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation :           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

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. Isolated incident.
 2. Had almost 4 ½ years of honorable service.

Decision

 Date: 20 10 1104            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 one 6105 counseling warning and one nonjudicial punishment for violation o f the Uniform Code of Mil itary Justice (UCMJ) : Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, wrongfully drive without a driver’s license). Per the Applicant’s DD Form 215 and his Individual Separation Information record, the Applicant had violated the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave, more than 30 days: 161 days) and was declared a deserter. After returning from his absence without leave, the Applicant was confined for 24 days. Despite his misconduct, the Applicant was allowed to finish his obligated service and then discharged.
Issue 1 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he had one incident in which he failed to have his driver ’s license in his possession and when he stopped to help a fellow Marine, who was intoxicated, get back to his barracks things got out of control. The Applicant feels he is being penalized because of this incident. The NDRB found no evidence, nor did the Applicant provide any, regarding this incident. While this incident may have contributed to the Applicant’s conduct marks, it was not the reason for his discharge. Since the Applicant was discharged for completion of required active service, his characterization of service is based on his proficiency/conduct (pro/con) marks during his enlistment. Generally, Marines with proficiency marks of 3.0 or higher and conduct marks of 4.0 or higher are given Honorable discharges. The Applicant’s overall marks for proficiency and conduct were 4.2 and 3.7, respectively. The NDRB determined the Applicant did not meet the minimum pro/con marks for an Honorable discharge and the awarded characterization of service was warranted.

Issue 2: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he had almost 4 ½ years of honorable service. As noted above, the Applicant was absent without leave for 161 days. This length of absence usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive or administrative discharge but opted to allow the Applicant to complete his required active service. The NDRB determined the Applicant did not have almost 4 ½ years of honorable service and 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 personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his discharge. 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 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 | MD0900130

    Original file (MD0900130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2.Record of service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400679

    Original file (MD1400679.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301497

    Original file (MD1301497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s records, the NDRB determined clemency was 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. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000270

    Original file (MD1000270.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 . ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201246

    Original file (MD1201246.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant’s misconduct during his enlistment warranted a Bad Conduct Discharge as the result of a Special Court-Martial, or at the very least, an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization as the result of administrative separation for misconduct, the NDRB is not authorized to change a discharge to a more unfavorable level. Despite the Applicant’s deployment to Iraq, his record contained repetitive, serious misconduct and below-average Proficiency and Conduct marks...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201579

    Original file (MD1201579.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201889

    Original file (MD1201889.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the Applicant did not meet the standards of conduct for an Honorable discharge for the period of active service from 21July 2003 to 4 August 2007 (which included making up 15 days of being absent without leave). 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000428

    Original file (MD1000428.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Nondecisional Issues: The Applicant seeks a change in characterization of service at discharge to Honorable in order to facilitate re-enlistment into military service and access to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) educational benefits.The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge characterization of service for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and his...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500237

    Original file (MD1500237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When counseled by his command for his violations of the UCMJ and findings at NJP, the Applicant chose not to make a written rebuttal of the charges or findings of guilty. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PATTERN...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000238 (2)

    Original file (MD1000238 (2).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Even if the 3rd DUI and IMPACT course attendance are taken out of the record, the Applicant had more than enough misconduct to warrant the ASB’s recommendations to separate him from the Marine Corps with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. However, the NDRB determined that the ASB did not consider the Applicant’s NJP from his first enlistment when formulating their recommendation for the Applicant to receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of...