Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300096
Original file (MD1300096.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20121016
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)       19950815 - 19950919     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19950920     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19990909      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 20 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 33
MOS: 0811
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (WITH 1 STAR)

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 19981014 :       Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) 2 specifications
         Specification 1: Wrongfully wearing pierced earrings in each ear on 19981009
         Specification 2: Wrongfully wearing pierced earrings in each ear on 19981010
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19990309 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation by wearing an earring)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19990730 :      Article (Absence without leave 0530-0615, 19990730)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , unauthorized visitor in his barracks room )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19990810 :      Article (Absence without leave 2330, 19990806 – 0700, 19990807)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation by breaking restriction)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

SPCM:


CC:



Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19961001 :       For your being admitted into a mental hospital for having homicidal and suicidal thoughts.

- 19981019 :       For violation of Marine Corps uniform regulations by wearing earrings and being corrected on two different occasions during a 24 hour period. The second violation came after being corrected by a First Sergeant earlier in the day and was told not to wear them again. This resulted in you being charged under the UCMJ and receiving NJP on 19981014.

- 1999011 :        For violating Marine Corps uniform regulations for wearing earrings. This is your second offense for wearing earrings.

- 19990809 :       For your pattern of misconduct as evident of three NJP’s within the last year. Though warned and disciplined, you continue to be “on your own program” and show your defiance for good order and discipline. Your non caring attitude and poor personal appearance are indicative of a Marine of your caliber. You remain unresponsive to the guidance and direction provided to you by the Marines in your chain of command.

- 19990810 :       For lack of professional judgment and your being UA which resulted in you receiving NJP for allowing a female into the barracks knowing it was unauthorized and also for being UA to your appointed place of duty.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ ”

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
31 January 1997 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 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 is too severe for the offenses committed.
2.       T he Applicant suggests that other member’s received lesser punishment for similar or greater offenses.
3.       The Applicant contends his in-service conduct, withstanding his UCMJ offenses, warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable.
4.       The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because his misconduct was the result of youthful indiscretions.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 3 0719            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 sta ndards 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, 5 specifications) and Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 2 specifications) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, 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 an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is too severe for the offenses committed. Additionally, the Applicant suggests that other member’s received lesser punishment for similar or greater offenses. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of disc ipline in the United States Marine Corps . A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Appli cant’s separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a n Under Other Than H onorable Conditions discharge was warranted. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends h is in-service conduct, withstanding his UCMJ offenses, warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. The Applicant states his character is demonstrated by promotion to Petty Officer Third Class and a Good Conduct Medal. 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 characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.
4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because his misconduct was the result of youthful indiscretions. While the Applicant may feel his youth was the underlying causes of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be hel d accountable for his actions. 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1501142

    Original file (MD1501142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s diagnosis, command administratively processed for separation. 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 CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600297

    Original file (ND0600297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.030617: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.030617: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200282

    Original file (MD1200282.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. However, the NDRB determined relief is warranted based on equitable grounds. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201425

    Original file (MD1201425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB is only authorized to review the propriety and equity of a discharge and cannot grant a change based solely on this issue. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00289

    Original file (MD01-00289.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Colonel date August 4, 1999Letter from Commanding Officer dated August 2, 1999 Letter from Commander dated August 17, 2000 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 960628 - 960909 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960910 Date...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201019

    Original file (MD1201019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined his characterization Under Other Than Honorable Conditions was equitable.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. ”...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000107

    Original file (MD1000107.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301139

    Original file (MD1301139.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 is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200412

    Original file (MD1200412.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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100652

    Original file (MD1100652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits. Relief denied.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...