Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300405
Original file (MD1300405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20121211
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)       20061018 - 20070211     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070212     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Month
Date of Discharge: 20110312      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on th 01 D a y
Education Level:        AFQT: 48
MOS: 0331
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( 13 ) / ( 13 )        Fitness R eports:

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

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20070628 :      Article (Assault)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20080121 :      Article (Assault)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20100916 :       Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation - driving under the influence of an impairing substance)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

- 20090701 :       Art icle (Absence without leave , 20090522-20090620, 30 days)
         Art icle (Missing movement, 20090523)
         Sentence :

SPCM:    CC:

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20100130 :       Charges: Levied by the North Carolina State Highway Patrol for f leeing the scene of an accident and driving a POV with an expired state vehicle inspection (NAMVC 118)




Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20070628 :       For assault

- 20080123 :       For assaulting his liberty buddy while getting him back to quarters

- 20100204 :       For being cited by the North Carolina State Highway Patrol for fleeing the scene of an accident and driving a POV with an expired state vehicle inspection and failing to properly and completely notify the chain of command of the incident.

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. 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 seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant contends that although his P roficiency (Pro) and C onduct (Con) marks were low, he is a combat veteran who mentored and trained fellow Marines.
 3.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0829            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 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, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation - driving under the influence of an impairing substance ) and Article (Assault, 2 specifications ) , for of the UCMJ: Article (Absence without leave, 20090522-20090620, 30 days ) and Article (Missing movement, 20090523) , and one civilian arrest for fleeing the scene of an accident and driving with an expired state inspection . The Applicant’s record of service reflects he was separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that although his Pro and Con marks were low, he is a combat veteran who mentored and trained fellow Marines. In accordance with Paragraph 1004 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, an Honorable characterization of service upon the expiration of active duty is appropriate when the quality of a Marine’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel. Therefore, characterization of service will be Honorable for Marines with average Proficiency marks of 3.0 or higher and average Conduct marks of 4.0 or higher. The Applicant completed his obligated service and his overall marks for proficiency and conduct were 3.5 and 3.4, respectively. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service. Relief denied.

Issue 3: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. 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 a character reference from a fellow Marine who asks that the Applicant not be given a General for an isolated incident of driving under the influence. An isolated incident late in the Applicant’s enlistment w as not the cause of the Applicant’s low Conduct marks. Rather, the Applicant displayed poor conduct throughout his enlistment as evidenced by three retention warnings, three NJPs, a civilian arrest, and a Summary Court-Martial for being UA for 30 days. Despite his combat service in Afghanistan, his Conduct otherwise in his enlistment was so poor that his General discharge was warranted, proper, and equitable. 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 | MD1500432

    Original file (MD1500432.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 128 (Assault), Article 86 (Absence without leave; 2 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct towards a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer), and Article 108 (Military property of the United States – Loss, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition). Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200936

    Original file (MD1200936.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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400263

    Original file (MD1400263.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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501100

    Original file (ND1501100.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300944

    Original file (MD1300944.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.A former servicemember has 15 years from his discharge date to apply to the NDRB for a review of his discharge characterization and narrative reason for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901906

    Original file (MD0901906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the Pro/Con marks and based on the limited post service documentation provided. 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 previous...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301270

    Original file (MD1301270.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901909

    Original file (MD0901909.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thus, the Applicant’s characterization of service during his enlistment was Honorable. Relief granted.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 COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601090

    Original file (ND0601090.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation 20050513: Medical evaluation by Substance Abuse counselor, LT MSC, USNR. Elements of Discharge: Discharge Process: Date...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401206

    Original file (MD1401206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. On 20090629, the administrative separations board found that the Applicant was guilty of a pattern of misconduct, and that his characterization of service should be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” 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...