Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301148
Original file (MD1301148.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130424
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)       19980115 - 19980126     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19980127     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20011214      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 17 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 49
MOS: 6048
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle MM

Period of CONF :

NJP:

- 2001092 6 :       Article (Absence without leave , failed to report to work , 0730-0845, 20010911 )
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19990122 :       For irresponsible conduct, specifically , in your financial dealings and your immoral behavior, unsatisfactory job performance, lack of initiative, poor judgment, and your unprofessional behavior.

- 20000921 :       For you were in violation of MCO P1020.34, which strictly prohibits the wearing of earrings.

- 20000921 :       For on 20000711, 20000731 , and 20000801, you were in violation of Article 86, unauthorized absence from place of duty.

- 20010726:      For failure to make progress on weight control resulting in 3.9 C onduct marking
- 20011017 :       For failure to maintain financial responsibilities. You have failed to provide financial support to your wife and child. You have been instructed by this command that while you are collecting BAH and are married that you will provide your family financial support.




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 P1900.16F), 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 contends his discharge was based on punishments and counseling s he received from a command who hazed him and retaliated against him for “blowing t he whistle” on his leadership.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 1219            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 86 ( Absence without leave , less than 24 hours ) and Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ) . 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 exercised right to consult with a qualified counsel, but waived his rights to submit a written statement and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was based on punishments and counselings he received from a command who hazed him and retaliated against him for “blowing the whistle” on his leadership. From evidence submi tted by the Applicant to the NDRB, the Applicant was subjected to physical abuse and hazing by his former enlisted leadership from the time he joined his unit in October 1998 until he reported the abuse in late 1999 or early 2000. The evidence indicates the Applicant received a S ummary C ourt- M artial for a violation of the UCMJ and was sentenced to confinement when he made his complaint of abuse. After an investigation substantiated the Applicant’s complaint, his record was expunged of the Summary Court-Martial conviction . However, the Applicant continued to commit violations of the UCMJ and received four counseling warnings for failure to maintain Marine Corps weight standards, for failure to provide financial support t o his wife and child, for wearing earrings in violation of Marine Corps order s , and for three violations of Article 86 (Absence without leave). The Applicant was also found guilty at NJP for violations of Article 86 and Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer) . On 11 April 2001, the Applicant was administratively reduced from E-3 to E-2 for failure to maintain weight standards. Evidence in the Applicant’s record also indicates he was arrested by civilian authorities for mult iple traffic violations , and he was evicted from base housing for failure to pay his rent and complaints of unacceptable behavior, wild parties, inappropriate house guests, and profane verbal threats and comments toward his neighbors. In addition, the Applicant’s average C onduct marks in service we re 3.6, which is reflective of below-average conduct for a Marine. An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service. After a complete review of the records and the documentation submitted by the Applicant, to include a statement from a retired Marine colonel and former commander of the Personnel Support Detachment at Marine Aircraft Group 16, the NDRB determined his misconduct was not mitigated by his hazing, there is no evidence of retaliation due to “blowing the whistle” on his leadership, and his persistent misconduct and poor behavior warranted an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge for Misconduct . 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 | MD1501052

    Original file (MD1501052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s misconduct charges were brought against him by the perpetrators of the hazing events which resulted in his assignment to PSD-16 for processing for administrative separation. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002227

    Original file (MD1002227.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201352

    Original file (ND1201352.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901030

    Original file (MD0901030.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401797

    Original file (MD1401797.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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101439

    Original file (ND1101439.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation.When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. Full relief to Honorable was not granted as the Board determined that the Applicant bore some responsibility for his misconduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301763

    Original file (ND1301763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200871

    Original file (ND1200871.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants education benefits.2. Representation: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501170

    Original file (ND0501170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.970625: Forfeiture of pay and reduction in pay grade awarded at NJP on 970614 vacated due to continued misconduct.970625: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: In that SA R_ M. F_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS MOUNT HOOD, on active duty, located at sea, did, on board USS MOUNT HOOD (AE-29), at or about 1630, 970615; 2130, 970618; and 0645, 970619, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Restricted...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401234

    Original file (MD1401234.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...