Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201429
Original file (MD1201429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120622
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to: or honorable
         Narrative Reason change to: MEDICAL
        
Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20060630 - 20060820     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060821     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20100520      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 0 D a y s
Education Level:        AFQT: 88
MOS: 6172
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (2) MM (4) C o C

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 20100121 :       Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, on or about 16 January 2010 violated the terms of his restriction an d liberty risk order by consuming alcohol)
         Article (Assault consummated by a battery, on or about 16 January 2010 unlawfully struck a LCpl in the face and did bodily harm to him with violence)
         Article (General Article , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Disorderly conduct, drunkenness , on or about 16 January 2010
         Specification 2: Imperson ating a noncommissioned officer, on or about 16 January 2010 impersonated a Corporal in an attempt to get Marines to s h ow their ID cards
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

- 20100109 :       Art icle (Larceny, at Okinawa , Japan on or about 19 July 2009, steal US currency of a value of $600, the property of a LCpl)
         Sentence :

SPCM: NONE        CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20100109 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 121 (Larceny); reference SCM dated 20100109.

- 20100121 :       For his participation in numerous physical altercations at B arracks 460 with fellow Marines.

- 20100121 :       For violations of UCMJ Articles 92, 128, and 134; reference NJP dated 20100121.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:
         “MARCORSEPMAN par 6210.6 ”
        
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 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), 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 seeks a change to his reenlistment code.
2.       The Appl icant contends prescription drug and alcohol abuse and dependency were mitigating factor s in his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends his honorable in-service conduct outweighs his misconduct.
4.       The Applicant contends Post - Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was a mitigating factor in his misconduct.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 3 0418            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
Discussion

 As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD, in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board reviewed the Applicant’s record to see if he deployed in support of a contingency operation and was, as a consequence of that deployment, diagnosed with either PTSD or Traumatic Brain Injury. A review of his record revealed that he did not deploy in support of a contingency operation, and so his case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1).
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, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation) , Article 128 ( Assault consummated by a battery) , and Article 134 ( General Article, two specifications) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 121 ( Larceny) . 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 exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement but w aived his right to request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change to his reenlistment 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Appl icant contends prescription drug and alcohol abuse and dependency were mitigating factor s in his misconduct. Drug and a lcohol consumption is never a rationale or an acceptable excuse for inappropriate conduct, misconduct, or poor judgment. Regulations require members who have an ongoing history of drug or alcohol abuse to be medically screened . If diagnosed as dependent on drugs or alcohol by competent medical authority , appropriate treatment must be offered prior to separation. The purpose of this treatment is not to rehabilitate a service member for further service but rather to provide treatment before separation. The NDRB concluded the command acted appropriately, equitably, and properly in processing the Applicant for separation. Relief denied.





: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his honorable in-service conduct outweighs his misconduct . The Applicant contends that prior to his knee surgery and addiction to painkillers, he wa s an outstanding Marine, was in the top ten percent, had received many awards , and was considered one of the best crew chiefs on Okinawa. The 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, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service, and the awarded cha racterization of service Under Other Than Honorable Conditions was warranted . Relief denied.

4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends PTSD was a mitigating factor in his misconduct. Documentation from U . S . Naval Hospital Okinawa , Japan , dated 29April 2010, indicates he was diagnosed with PTSD as result of severe child sex ual abuse. The same document further states that the Applicant’s alcohol dependency and PTSD clearly existed prior to joining the military and was exacerbated by a second sexual assault while on active duty. Additionally, the Applicant submitted a letter from the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department, Marine Corps Base Camp S medley Butler, Okinawa , dated 3 May 2010 , that states “the SNM is responsible for his actions” and “there is no psychiatric contraindication to any administrative, legal, or disciplinary action which the command may deem necessary. ” After a complete review of the records and documentation and statement submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined his PTSD did not mitigate his misconduct and discerned no impropriety or inequity in the Applicant ’ s discharge proceedings and characterization of service. 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201634

    Original file (MD1201634.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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000818

    Original file (MD1000818.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was provided both directed outpatient counseling and managed care along with in-patient hospitalization for treatment of his alcohol abuse, as requested, prior to discharge.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s documentation, 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500321

    Original file (MD1500321.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200788

    Original file (MD1200788.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200431

    Original file (ND1200431.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits.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 of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000266

    Original file (MD1000266.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. misconduct was resultant from PTSD. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400248

    Original file (ND1400248.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 . ” 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301852

    Original file (MD1301852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of controlled substances, THC, 57 ng/ml)Awarded: Suspended: SCM:SPCM:CC: Retention Warning Counseling: 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900729

    Original file (MD0900729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. 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:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300009

    Original file (MD1300009.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.