Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100367
Original file (MD1100367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101130
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)       20010918 - 20020113     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020114     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060603      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 20 D a y ( s )
Education Level: 12      AFQT: 51
MOS: 0341
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): 3.8 ( ) / 3.8 ( )      Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      PH (x2), (w/Combat V Device), , , , , , (x2), , CertCom, Mert Mast , Rifle (Expert)

Periods of UA : 2 0020904 - 20030122 (141 days)

NJP:     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, (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 .

C. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT.

D. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a specia l or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (in excess of 30 days).


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1 .       Decisional issues : (Equity) The Applicant contends that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service at discharge does not reflect his honest and faithful service to the Nation; as such, the Applicant contends that a review of his service record will warrant an upgrade to Honorable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 03 24            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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant identified one decisional issue regarding equitability to the NDRB. In reviewing the Applicant’s issue, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.
The Applicant is a combat veteran, having served in direct combat operations as a n Infantryman in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) from 02 February 2003 to 11 July 2003 (OIF I) and again from 01 September 2004 to 27 March 2005 (OIF II) . The Applicant received the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal with Combat Distinguishing Device for Valorous Service in combat actions against enemy forces. The Applicant also received the Combat Action Ribbon for individual actions against enemy forces while deployed in the Al-Anbar Province, Iraq. The Applicant ’ s combat service to his nation also includes the awarding of the Purple Heart – twice – during a single combat deployment for fragmentation injuries received in a mortar attack and for injuries received in an Improvised Explosive Device attack that resulted in shrapnel and blast fragmentation injuries and a loss of consciousness.

The Applicant’s record of military service included no 6105 retention counseling warnings and no administrative or judicial punishments. However, the Applicant’s service record does contain a period of unauthorized absence from 20020904 to 20030122 (141 days) that resulted in his being dropped from the unit rol ls and declared a deserter. The Applicant’s period of unauthorized absence ended when he surrendered himself to his unit to deploy to Operation IRAQI FREEDOM.

Issue 1: (Decisional) ( ), . The Applicant contends that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service at discharge does not reflect his honest and faithful service to the Nation; as such, the Applicant contends that a review of his service record will warrant an upgrade to Honorable.

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 Applicant submitted no evidence to rebut this presumption. The Applicant’s record of service contained an extensive period of u nauthorized a bsence ( 141 days). The Applicant surrendered himself to military custody by returning to his unit on 200 30122 , ending his deserter status. He joined his unit and deployed to Iraq on 20030202 for the initial combat operations of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM. The Applicant completed his combat deployment, did not receive any punitive or administrative punishment for his extensive unauthorized absence, and was promoted and elevated in billet assignments and responsibilities. The Applicant deployed again with his Infantry Battalion to Iraq where he received the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal (With combat V) and two Purple Hearts for his service in the Ar-Ramadi area of operations.

Per paragraph 1004 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN) , characterization of service is the recognition of the quality of a Marine’s performance and conduct. An Honorable characterization of service is the highest quality of characterization and is appropriate when the quality of the Marine’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. Performance and conduct forms the primary basis for determining characterization of a Marine’s service and are determined pursuant to MCO P1610.7 (Performance Evaluation System), MCO P1070.12 (Individual Records Administration Manual (IRAM)), and the customs of the service.

As directed by paragraph 1004 of the MARCORSEPMAN, characterization of service will be honorable for Marines with average proficiency marks of 3.0 or higher and average conduct marks of 4.0 or higher. Failure of a Marine to achieve either of these standards is evidence of significant negative aspects, outweighing all but the most meritorious military records. Marines who do not achieve these standards should not receive an H onorable discharge. In reviewing the Applicant’s official service record, the NDRB noted that the Applicant’s average Proficiency and Conduct marks in service were 3.8 /3. 8 , respectively. Due to the Applicant’s extensive period of unauthorized absence and being declared a deserter early in his enlistment, he received Proficiency and Conduct Markings of 0.0 /0.0 , thus lowering his in-service average proficiency and conduct to 3.8/3.8. Based on these marks, as directed by the MARCORSEPMAN , the Command award ed the Applicant a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.

Although the command could have pursued either administrative or punitive action to address the A pplicant’s misconduct in accordance with the MARCORSEPMAN, it did not. In doing so, the Command allowed the Applicant to be separated upon completion of his active obligated service with a characterization of service as warranted by his record of service: General (Under Honorable Conditions). However, the Applicant’s service of record since his period of unauthorized absence was extremely meritorious in nature , resulting in promotion and advancement with average Proficiency and Conduct markings in grade as a Corporal of 4.6/4.6. The period of service since the unauthorized absence has been highlighted with 2 combat deployments, 2 Purple Heart awards, personal awarding for heroic action in combat against enemy forces, and selection to duty as an instructor at the Division Schools.

After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety in the discharge action , but did discern an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s service to his nation reflected a most meritorious military record of honorable and faithful service and sacrifice, highlighted with heroic a chievements in combat. The NDRB voted unanimously that relief was warranted and that an upgrade in the characterization of the discharge to Honorable was appropriate . Relief , as requested, is provided.

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 NDRB did note that Block 27 on the Applicant’s Form DD-214 reflects a Reentry Code of RE-3C - not eligible [for re-enlistment] and disqualifying factor is not covered by any other code . The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the armed forces, and is not authorized to change a reentry code. To seek a change to a reentry code, t he Applicant must petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) using DD Form - 149. When requesting this change, the Applicant should provide as much documentation as possible to identify the inequity of the assigned code and justify a change . The BCNR’s address is: Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100. Further information may be found online at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm .


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 | MD0902572

    Original file (MD0902572.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300261

    Original file (MD1300261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service reflects he received overall Con marks of 3.9 based upon 12 gradings, which includes a mark of “0.0” as a result of being declared a deserter. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500974

    Original file (MD1500974.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902464

    Original file (MD0902464.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20001030 - 20010813Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010814Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20051202Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)19 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:49MOS: 0311Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801414

    Original file (MD0801414.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), failure to maintain grooming standards 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: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300410

    Original file (MD1300410.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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400139

    Original file (MD1400139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20060119 - 20060124Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060125Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20110730Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)06 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:52MOS: 0311Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):/Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001924

    Original file (MD1001924.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, based on an administrative impropriety, the Board determined that the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300542

    Original file (MD1300542.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Participation in the VEERP program does not exempt a Marine’s characterization of service from this requirement.Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000102

    Original file (MD1000102.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanders are to base the new period’s evaluation markings on the performance and conduct in the current grade.Additionally, the assignment of any conduct markings below 4.0, for any reason other than court-martial or reduction at NJP, requires documentation in the service member’s service record book. ” 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...