Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100371
Original file (MD1100371.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101129
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)       19950914 - 19951112     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19951113     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 199905 24      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 12 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
MOS: 0341
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2)

Periods of CONF :

Time lost per DD214: 19990329 - 19990421 , 24 days ; 19990326 - 19990328 , 3 days

NJP:

- 19961024 :       Article ( General A rticle - d ischarged a rifle, th rough negligence)
         Awarded: Suspended: Vacated on 19970224

- 19970310 :      Article ( Insubordinate conduct toward noncommissioned officer - d isrespectful in language to SSgt J_ by saying “I aint going no damn where ” )
         Article ( General A rticle - d runk and disorderly)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 19980203 :      Article ( Absence without leave - a bsent from appointed place of duty , on 971010 from 0730 to 0745 )
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19970127 :       For failure to obey orders and regulations of the UCMJ

- 19970428 :       For failure to obey and follow orders and regulations of the UCMJ





Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:
         
Block 24 CHAR A CTER OF SERVICE should rea d “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CO NDITIONS ”

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:           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. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 until 31 August 2001.

 B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

C . 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 seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities .
2.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits .
3 .       The Applicant contends he warrants an upgrade base d on his in-service conduct.
4.       The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by marriage problems.
5 .       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 0405            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 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 86 ( Absence without leave - absent from appointed place of duty, on 971010 from 0730 to 0745 ), Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward noncommissioned officer - disrespectful in language to SSgt J_by saying “I aint going no damn where ” ), and Article 134 ( General A rticle - on 19961024 for discharg ing a rifle, through negligence, and on 19970310 for drunk and disorderly ) . The Applicant’s record reflects that he avoided court-martial by requesting and being accepted for s eparation i n l ieu of t rial by c ourt-martial (SILT) for violating an unspecified UCMJ a rticle. P er regulations, to attain approval for a SILT request, servicemembers must have been afforded the opportunity to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. They must also fully understand the elements of the offense(s) for which they were charged , and they must admit their guilt. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for medical and home-loan 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he warrants an upgrade base d on his in-service conduct. In the Applicant’s 3 ½ years of service, he had two 6105 retention warnings and three NJPs and had charges referred to trial by Special Court-Martial. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by committing one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service . Th e awarded characteriza tion of service was warranted. Relief denied.




4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by marriage problems. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most servicemembers, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their H onorable discharges. In fairness to those servicemembers, command ing officers and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due. There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate he attempted to utilize the numerous services available for servicemembers who undergo marriage problems during their enlistment s, such as the Navy Chaplain, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even his chain of command . The NDRB determined the Applicant’s marriage problems were not mitigating factors in his misconduct. Relief denied.

5 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. The NDRB considers 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. Besides the Applicant ’ s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any additional documentation and evidence on his behalf. Although the Applicant states he has been a good citizen and a commercial truck driver for many years , he failed to provide substantial documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. To warrant an upgrade , the Applicant’s post - service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced evidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the A ddendum with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. 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 for additional information.


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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101264

    Original file (ND1101264.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 entriesand 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201062

    Original file (MD1201062.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300291

    Original file (ND1300291.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Given the facts of the case, the Special Court-Martial awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge and confinement for 55 days. ” 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1101482

    Original file (MD1101482.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900312

    Original file (ND0900312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB reviewed the Applicant’s service medical record and determined the Applicant was not diagnosed with a mental illness while in the Navy. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s record of service 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, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201130

    Original file (ND1201130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001885

    Original file (ND1001885.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.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 | MD1300631

    Original file (MD1300631.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant, however, was not taken to a Special Court-Martial but was administratively separated after requesting separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT). The Applicant could have provided additional documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301218

    Original file (MD1301218.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s Bad Conduct Discharge was ordered executed by Special Court-Martial Supplemental Order Number 09-0053 on 11 February 2009.: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks clemency to reenlist into the Armed Forces.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. Clemency denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201148

    Original file (ND1201148.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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...