Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400431
Original file (MD1400431.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140106
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to: OR general (under honorable conditions)
         Narrative Reason change to:
        
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20081104 - 20090308     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20090309     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20111115      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 07 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 46
MOS: 3531
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /                  Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):      Rifle LoA

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

- 20101208 :       Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: D id, on or about 30 November 2010, violate a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under age
         Specification 2: W as, on or about 30 November 2010, derelict in the performance of his duties in that he negligently consumed alcohol within 8 hours prior to duty and was unable to perform the duties of motor transport operator
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20110824 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation; did, having knowledge of a lawful order not to drive while intoxicated and to have an alternate plan, on or about 28 July 2011, fail to obey the same by driving while intoxicated and not having an alternate plan)
         Article (Drunk or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel; did, on or about 28 July 2011, physically control a vehicle in a reckless or wanton manner by driving 20 MPH+ over the posted speed limit (60 MPH in a 35 MPH zone))
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20101208 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 92, 2 specifications; reference NJP dated 20101208

- 20110223 :       For drinking under the age of 21 on or about 13 February 2011


- 20110418 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 86; on 12 April 20 1 1 , failed to report to Intensive Outpatient Treatment Planning Session at the Consolidated Substance Abuse Counseling Center

- 20110824 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 92 and Article 111; reference NJP dated 20110824

- 20110915 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 134, 2 specifications, breaking restriction , additionally you were witnessed allowing your girlfriend and her two children in your barracks room, which is in direct violation of your restriction

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 seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the Armed Forces.
2.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for educational benefits.
3.       The Applicant contends his discharge was based on numerous unjust charges.
4 .       The Applicant contends family problems and depression contributed to his misconduct.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 4 0702           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 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 3 specifications) and Article 111 (Drunk or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel). 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 rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the Armed Forces. 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.
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for educational benefits. 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 his discharge was based on num erous unjust charges. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention the command treated him unfairly. The Applicant’s service included five retention warning s and two NJPs for violations of UCMJ Article 92 (3 specifications) and Article 111 . Violations of Article s 92 and 111 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized. In accordance with paragraph 6210.3 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, the Applicant was properly separated by reason of Pattern of Misconduct. During the separation proceedings, the Applicant waived his right s to consult with counsel, to request a hearing before an Administrative Separation Board, and to submit a rebuttal to the separation. If the Applicant believed there were mitigating circumstances, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made. During an Administrative Separation Board, he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense against the charges. Relief denied.



4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant co ntends family problems and depression contributed to his misconduct. While the Applicant may feel that his personal and family difficulties were a contributing factor to his misconduct, they do not mitigate his disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the Naval Service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500656

    Original file (MD1500656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle), Article 107 (False official statements), Article 121(Larceny), Article 134 (General Article, intent to defraud). Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901950

    Original file (MD0901950.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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400339

    Original file (MD1400339.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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000437

    Original file (MD1000437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100445

    Original file (ND1100445.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700751

    Original file (MD0700751.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20020725 - 20020902Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020903Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20051222Length of Service: 03 Yrs 03Mths20 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000540

    Original file (MD1000540.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board completed 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 warning, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 4 specifications)and Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, BAC NFIR); and for of the UCMJ: Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901400

    Original file (ND0901400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, being subjected to punishment at an NJP proceeding does not precluded a service member from being administratively processed for separation since administrative separations are not considered punitive in nature.Based on a review of the evidence of record and evidence presented by the Applicant, the Board determined there was sufficient evidence to support a administrative separation based on misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and that an upgrade to Honorable...

  • 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201274

    Original file (MD1201274.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administrative board voted 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported the Applicant had a pattern of misconduct and recommended separation with a characterization 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...