Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100978
Original file (MD1100978.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110309
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)       20010718 - 20010917     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20010918     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20040202      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 15 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
MOS: 7051
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): NFIR         Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP: 2

- 20021104 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, underage drinking)
         Awarded: RIR RESTR EPD Suspended:

- 20031215 :      Article 121 (Larceny, stole several personal items from a corporal)
         Awarded: RIR FOP EPD Suspended:

SCM: NONE SPCM: NONE      CC: NONE

Retention Warning Counseling: 4

- 20020614:      For being stopped at the main gate for underage drinking

- 20021121 :      For underage drinking

- 20030811:      For underage drinking


- 20031222 :      For stealing several personal items from a corporal








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:        
         Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant: 
         From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

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 wants his discharge upgraded so he can take advantage of benefits and services offered by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs , specifically , the G.I. Bill.
2.       The Applicant contends he used alcohol to deal with his feelings of depression after his father died
, which result ed in his misconduct.
3 .       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration for upgrading his discharge .

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0517            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation : NONE

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 four 6105 counseling warnings and two non - judicial punishments for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, underage drinking) and Article 121 (Larceny, stole several personal items from a corporal). B ased on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. T he NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant has an HKA1 separation code on his DD Form 214 , which indicates he waived his right to re quest an administrative board .

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can take advantage of benefits and services offered by the VA , specifically , the G.I. Bill. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of facilitating access to VA benefits. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities or employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he used alcohol to deal with his feelings of depression after his father died , which result ed in his misconduct . The NDRB found no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any evidence , indicating he attempted to u s e the numerous services available for service members who suffer from depression or other emotional problems during their enlistment s such as Navy c haplains, medical or mental health professionals, or family advocacy programs. The NDRB recognizes serving in the U.S. Marine Corps is challenging. However, it must be noted that most members of the Marine Corps serve honorably and, therefore, earn their Honorable or General discharges. In fairness to those members of the Marine Corps , commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due. Although the Applicant is only requesting that his discharge be upgraded to General (Under Honorable Conditions), t he Board determined that the nature of the misconduct, especially the violation of Article 121, warranted the characterization of service assigned at the time of separation. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration for upgrading his discharge . 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. The Applicant provided one character reference regarding his post-service character and conduct. He also provided a personal statement describing his post-service activities, which included going to school to become an emergency medical technician and a firefighter, pursuing a college degree, being active in his community, church , and family, and no

longer drinking alcohol. However, he provided no documentary evidence of those activities listed in his statement. The Applicant could have provided 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 conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate his in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the UCMJ violations. 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | MD0901898

    Original file (MD0901898.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the treatment failure, the Applicant’s command administratively processed him for separation. The NDRB determined this issue is without merit, and the narrative reason for separation was appropriate.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001845

    Original file (MD1001845.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19970626 - 19980607Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19980608Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20011231 Appellate Leave Date: 19991018Length of Service: Years Months09 DaysHighest Rank:Education Level: AFQT:97MOS: 7253Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NFIR / NFIRFitness Reports: Awards...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101368

    Original file (ND1101368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative separation board.The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 2 December 2009 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901319

    Original file (MD0901319.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.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. ” 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100300

    Original file (MD1100300.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief 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 .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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500286

    Original file (MD1500286.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 COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901531

    Original file (MD0901531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct and the awarded characterization of discharge 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902163

    Original file (MD0902163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800382

    Original file (ND0800382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.The Applicant’s record of service was marred by two NJP’s for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 121 (Stealing from the Navy Exchange) and Article 92 (Underage drinking). ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002082

    Original file (MD1002082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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