Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200607
Original file (MD1200607.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120123
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)       20050316 - 20050322     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20050323     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20090531      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 09 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): (12) / (13)        Fitness Reports:

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

NJP:

- 20050528 :      NFIR [Date extracted from 3270]
         Awarded: NFIR Suspended: NFIR
- 20050927 :      Article (Absence without leave 20050813-20050902, 20 days)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20061128 :      Article (Absence without leave 20061107)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20061213 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - providing and drinking alcohol with underage Marines)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

- 20070124 :      Article (Absence without leave 20061215-2007011, 27 days )
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (General A rticle - breaking restriction)
          Sentence: 29 DAYS (20070124-20070215, 23 days)

SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20050927 :      For unauthorized absence, in that you were absent from you r place of duty on 20050813-20050904 .

- 20061213 :      For failure to obey order or regulation.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

          “ (20) 20050813-20050901, (1) 20061107, (27) 20061215-20070110, (23) 20070124-20070215 ”

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

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.       The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can receive the GI Bill.
2.       The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded to improve employment opportunities.
 3.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.
 4.       The Applicant contends he was under stress at the time of his misconduct.
5.       The Applicant contends his record of service warrant s consideration for upgrading his discharge.

Decision

Date: 20 1 30103            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 6105 counseling warnings and non-judicial punishments (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 3 specifications) and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification). The information regarding the violations that resulted in the NJP of 28 May 2005 was not found in the Applicant’s service record. The Applicant also had summary court-martial for of the UCMJ: Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 1 specification), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification), and Article 134 (General Article - Breaking restriction, 1 specification) . Although the Applicant served for the duration of his contract, his average C onduct marks did not meet the minimum requirement for his service to be characterized as Honorable. Standards of performance and conduct as determined by MCO P1610.7 series ( Performance Evaluation System ) , MCO P1070.12 series ( Individual Records Administration Manual ) , and customs of the service form the primary basis for determining characterization of service. The minimum acceptable average P roficiency and C onduct markings during an enlistment are 3.0 and 4.0 , respectively. The Applicant’s failure to achieve the standard for C onduct is evidence of significant negative aspects, outweighing all but the most meritorious military records. As a result, his service was characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions).

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

: (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded to improve employment opportunities. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants 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 a personal statement and two character references. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts needed to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the low overall Conduct marks and number of UCMJ violations . Relief denied.

Issue 4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was under stress at the time of his misconduct . The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most service members, however, manage to serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges. In fairness to those service members, commanders 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 use the numerous services available for service members who suffer from stress during their enlistment s , such as Navy Chaplains, medical or mental health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross. The Board determined that relief based on this issue was not warranted. Relief denied.

Issue 5: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his record of service, specifically his three deployments, warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge. Despite a service member’s record of service, to include combat service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Marine Corps to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant had four NJPs , one summary court-martial, and two retention warnings . Misconduct of this repetitive, serious nature almost always results in administrative discharge with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. However, his command allowed him to complete his contract. The Board determined the awarded characterization was very equitable and that rel ief based on this issue was not warranted. 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 | 2010_Marine | MD1002234

    Original file (MD1002234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As a result, you received NJP on 20070124 and were found guilty under the UCMJ of violation of Article 112a.- 20061212:For your misconduct, specifically your positive urinalysis for THC on 20061212. Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military.2. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100734

    Original file (ND1100734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant did not submit any post-service documentation to evaluate his post-service conduct. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801828

    Original file (MD0801828.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 accordance with...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001353

    Original file (MD1001353.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 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 Applicant’s date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100690

    Original file (MD1100690.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902191

    Original file (ND0902191.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 | 2011_Marine | MD1101485

    Original file (MD1101485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant completed his service obligation, his record of service included evidence of significant negative aspects and his average Conduct marks did not meet the requirement to issue him an Honorable discharge. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200578

    Original file (MD1200578.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/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900610

    Original file (MD0900610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, the Applicant had an additional period of UA for 38 days which was not adjudicated.The NDRB determined the Applicant’s claims of verbal abuse and harassment are not substantiated by the record of evidence and do not justify his actions of misconduct:The Applicant should understand misconduct by other service members is not a viable excuse for the Applicant’s misconduct. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902477

    Original file (MD0902477.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 the basic Record of Trial by Special Court-Martial, 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...