Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201397
Original file (MD1201397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120612
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)       20030915 - 20040719     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20040720     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 200 6 0 6 0 9      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 20 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 63
MOS: 3432
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): 4.1 ( ) / 3.8 ( )        Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle CoC

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20051108 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - attempted to go to Mexico without authorization)
         Awarded: Suspended: Suspension vacated 20051116

- 20051129 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Unauthorized visitor in room
         Specification 2: Ten minutes late to 0900 restriction check in
          Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20050526 :      For absence without leave. On 20050505 you failed to be at your appointed place of duty at the appointed time. Specifically you were UA from the 1730 Barracks Fi e ld Day Formation and a Disbursing inspection at 2000, on 20050505.

- 20051116 :      For failure to obey order or regulation. On or about 2300, 29 October you violated Article 92, specifically Group Order 1050.1E, enclosure (3), by attempting to go to Mexico without written authorization or proper identification.

- 20051206 :      For misconduct, specifically your recent NJP for violation of Article 92 x 2. On 20051111, you violated your restriction orders by having an unauthorized visitor in your BEQ room. On 20051112, you violated your restriction orders in that you were ten minutes late for your 0900 check in with the OOD.

- 20060419 :      For Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome.

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 and Present, paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT .

 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 was inequitable , because it was solely based on his service-connected injury.
Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0410            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. T he 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 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 3 specifications). Based on the recommendation of the Deputy Group Surgeon that the Applicant had a physical condition, not a disability , command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because it was solely based on his service-connected injury. The Applicant is correct in that he was solely notified of administrative separation processing for Condition, Not a Disability, though he also met the requirements for administrative separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense) and Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct). Per Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual paragraph 6203, Physical Condition Not a Disability, w henever a Marine ’ s performance deteriorates or has an adverse effect on others in the unit, commanding officers and subordinate leaders will try to determine the cause. When the command suspects a physical condition interferes with the Marine ’ s effective performance of duty, the Marine should be referred to the appropriate medical authority. If examination by a medical officer confirms that the Marine is suffering from a physical condition apparently beyond the individual ’ s control and indicates that the condition is not a disability, initiate separation proceedings. When separated for this reason, the least favorable characterization of service is G eneral (U nder H onorable C onditions ) . On 26 M ay 2006, the Deputy Group Surgeon concurred with the command ’ s assessment of the Applicant’s condition and recommended administrative separation. Since, t he Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation, the characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, which included two NJPs, four retention warnings, and below average Proficiency and Conduct marks of 4.1/3.8, respectively, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Furthermore, the Applicant’s c ommanding o fficer provided the following comments on his separation recommendation, “Throughout his 20- month career so far , PFC [Applicant] has accrued several minor offenses against the UCMJ. H is tendency to challenge established rules and regulations threatens to affect the morale, good order , and discipline of the Marines within his unit and is clearly enough to administratively discharge him from the Marine Corps due to a pattern of misconduct. However, in light of his condition and professional contributions to his section’s mission , I am recommending that he be discharged from the Marine Corps with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service as soon as practical.” 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 15 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 | MD1000014

    Original file (MD1000014.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. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201277

    Original file (MD1201277.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1000841

    Original file (MD1000841.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 2 April 1998.The Applicant was administratively separated due to weight control failure after being assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP) for one year.When notified of administrative separation processing, the Applicant exercised his right to consult with qualified counsel, but waived rights to submit a written statement and request an administrative board. However, even...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500624

    Original file (MD1500624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, four for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 (Attempts, using another Marines meal card), Article , Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation),and Article . 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701088

    Original file (MD0701088.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate.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. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201769

    Original file (MD1201769.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901573

    Original file (MD0901573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB determined the characterization of service received was warranted.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801757

    Original file (ND0801757.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade 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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201818

    Original file (MD1201818.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300794

    Original file (MD1300794.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant...