Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400150
Original file (MD1400150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20131016
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN 8401 [DISABILITY DISCHARGE WITH SEVERANCE PAY]

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:
        
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20061101 - 200 7 1021     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20071022     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20110929      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 33
MOS: 2111
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /                   Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):      Rifle CoA

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 20100507 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, driving on base with a RADAR detection device)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20100716 :       Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article 134 (General A rticle - t hreat, communicating)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20100826 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, speeding 74 mph in a 55 mph zone )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20101007 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, breaking restriction)
         Article 107 (False official statement s )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20110812 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

- 20101108 :       Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, breaking restriction)
         Sentence :

SPCM:    CC:


Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20090112 :       For failing to let his chain of command know about financial difficulties in the area of failing to pay child support to the mother of his child. SNM has had many opportunities to inform his chain of command of his failure to pay child support but continued to mislead his chain of command.

- 20090126 :       For reckless driving. SNM was going 92 mph in a 65 mph zone. This is the second time SNM has been caught speeding.

- 20100301 :       For violation of Article 86.

- 20100504 :       For your unauthorized absence, disrespect to a senior NCO, and disobedience of a lawful order.

- 20100507 :       For receiving Battalion level non-judicial punishment for violation of Article 92.

- 20100716 :       For receiving Company level non-judicial punishment for violations of Article 91 and Article 134.

- 20100826 :       For receiving Battalion level non-judicial punishment for violation of Article 92.

- 20100830 :       For lying to the Battalion Sergeant Major.

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 8401, Disability Discharge with Severance Pay 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 he should have been allowed to remain until his end of active service.

Decision

Date: 20140428            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY .
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 Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 4 specifications), Article 107 (False official statements), and Article 134 (General A rticle - Threat, communicating) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, breaking restriction). Per the Applicant’s DD Form 214, the Applicant was separated due to a physical disability and received separation pay.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he should have been allowed to remain until his end of active service. The Applicant contends that he was medically discharged against his will due to his knee and would have received an Honorable characterization if allowed to go to his end of active service . With the Applicant’s 8 retention warnings, 5 NJPs, and a Summary Court-Martial during his enlistment, he met the requirements to be administratively separated for Misconduct (Serious Offense) and Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct). Department of Defense disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons, such as disability. However, in the Applicant’s case, his command determined to allow him to go through the Physical Evaluation Board process instead of administratively discharging him for Misconduct, which would likely have resulted in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. Once it was determined that his disability prevented further service, the Applicant was separated with severance pay. Since 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’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 discharge proceedings and characterization of service w ere 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 DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY . 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900061

    Original file (MD0900061.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SNM received NJP for violation of Article 92 Retention Warning Counseling: for which he was placed on Battalion restriction. SNM is also informed that further incidents of this nature may result in NJP and other administrative action to include but not limited to administrative separation. The Board determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflected a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service member...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201809

    Original file (MD1201809.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant did receive a medical-related discharge and was not processed for Misconduct (Serious Offense) or Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct), both of which he qualified for. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100333

    Original file (MD1100333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601122

    Original file (MD0601122.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-PVT, USMC MD06-01122Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060822Characterization of Service: UNDER Narrative Reason for Separation: Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN PAR 6210.3Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: VMGR-252 MAG-14 2DMAWApplicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Review Requested: Representation: Decision: Date of Decision: 20070706 Location of Board: Washington D.C.Complete Service Record: YES Complete...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300670

    Original file (MD1300670.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 May 2011, an Administrative Separation Board convened and determined by a vote of 3-0 that a preponderance of the evidence supported that the Applicant committed a pattern of misconduct, that the Applicant should be administratively separated, and that the characterization of service should be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401651

    Original file (MD1401651.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB thoroughly reviewed the Applicant’s service record and it clearly depicts that on 20130722 the Applicant was issued a 6105 counseling warning for receiving a ticket for driving 80 mph in a 45 mph zone while on base. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201845

    Original file (MD1201845.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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201377

    Original file (MD1201377.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Rather, three months after this incident, he went to his third NJP in his enlistment and was found guilty of violating UCMJ Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) for using Spice and Bath Salts, both of which violate the Marine Corps drug policy and warrant mandatory administrative separation processing. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201175

    Original file (MD1201175.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 | MD1100429

    Original file (MD1100429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years...