Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000416
Original file (MD1000416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-WO, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20091119
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN 4102

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         ANG 19900928 – 1 9910109          Active:   ANG 19910110 – 19920111 HON
         ANG 19920112 – 19950130                  USMC 19950131 – 19981004 HON
USMC 19981005 – 20020124 HON
USMC 20020125 – 20030202 HON
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030203     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20040203      H ighest Rank: Warrant Officer
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 1 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 63
MOS: 2340
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): N/A          Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (3) (2) (2) CoC(3) LoA(6) CoA(2) MM

NJP:
- 20030609 :       Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer)
         Article 117 (Provoking speech – 2 specifications)
         Article 128 (Assault)
         Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly – 2 specifications)
          Awarded: Letter of Censure Suspended:

SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

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, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4102, MCO P1900.16F effective 01 September 2001 until Present, processing for separation.

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 prior record of service.
2 . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.
Decision

Date: 20110106 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer), Article 117 (Provoking speech - 2 specifications), Article 128 (Assault) , and Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly - 2 specifications). Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s entire administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant exercised or waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel or request an administrative board. However, he did submit written statements for consideration by the separating authority.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on his prior record of service. Despite a Marine’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval Service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Marine Corps. The Commanding Officer and superior officers within th e chain of command reviewed the facts of the case and the requests of the Applicant and determined that a preponderance of the evidence support ed separation from the Naval S ervice and that a General (Under Honorable C onditions) discharge was warranted. The NDRB’s review supports their conclusion. As such, relief is denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. The Applicant provided several documents that highlight h is accomplishments as an Army contractor and civil servant for the Marine Corps. To warrant an upgrade , the Applicant’s post - service efforts need to be more encompassing. T here is no law or regulation that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. The Board determined the characterization of service received was appropriate. 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 Additional 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301450

    Original file (MD1301450.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the records and documentation submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined he did not present any documentation to prove the commanding officer or his Board of Inquiry disregarded relevant information or failed to comply with applicable regulations during the NJP and Board of Inquiry proceedings. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01090

    Original file (MD03-01090.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19990129 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for unacceptable conduct (A and B). Relief denied.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900328

    Original file (MD0900328.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB advises the Applicant that despite a service member’s record of service prior to or following misconduct, certain serious offenseswarrant separation from the Marine Corps in order to maintain good order and discipline—the offenses committed by the Applicant met this standard. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700608

    Original file (MD0700608.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, was marred by the award of two nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 92 (Failure to obey order, regulation), and Article 111 (Drunken or reckless driving). Officer administrative separationDischarge Process Applicant provided written notice of administrative separation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01305

    Original file (MD02-01305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ]010628: Commanding Officer, Basic School, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, VA, recommended Applicant's retention in lieu of separation for misconduct due to civilian conviction of two counts of indecent exposure and failing to demonstrate acceptable qualities of leadership required of an officer in his grade when he lied to a police officer. 011015: CG, Training and Education Command, recommended Applicant be administratively separated as a probationary officer and his...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600531

    Original file (MD0600531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The evidence reviewed, including the Applicant’s own admission, supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed the misconduct, that separation from the Naval service was appropriate, and that a general (under honorable conditions) discharge was warranted. Secretary of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000915

    Original file (MD1000915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant was convicted in civilian court in 2008, the offense happened 18 years prior and before she enlisted in the Marine Corps. 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 change to . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801485

    Original file (MD0801485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00848

    Original file (MD03-00848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed the Board first conducts a record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902128

    Original file (MD0902128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, and to present his case at a BOI.The Applicant appeared before a Board of Inquiry, who recommended, by a 3-0 vote, that the Applicant be with characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...