ex-PVT, USMC
MD06-01078

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:  				20060814
Narrative Reason for Separation:			
Character of Service:				
Discharge Authority:				MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3
Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge:	hqsvcbn hqsvcco iii mef

Applicant’s Request:
	Narrative Reason change to: 		NONE REQUESTED
	Characterization change to:		
	Review Requested:			
Representation:  					

Decision:

Date of Decision:					20070628
Location of Board:				Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:				YES
Complete Medical Record:			YES
Complete Discharge Package:			YES
Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:	
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:	EQUITABLE

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  MISCONDUCT

Summary of Service:

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)				19980728 - 19981020 
Active:   NONE
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  				19981021
Years Contracted:  				;        
Date of Discharge:				20000315
Length of Service:				01  Yrs  04  Mos  25  Days
Time Lost During This Period:			

Education Level:  				
Age at this Enlistment:  				
AFQT:  						43
MOS:						0151
Highest Rate/Rank:				PFC

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency:					4.3 (4)
Conduct:					3.6 (4) 

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214):
RIFLE EXPERT BADGE, MERITORIOUS MAST

Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

19990804:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 92:  On or about 0100, 19990703 fail to obey a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages under the legal drinking age.
	Article 134:  On or about 0100, 19990703, drunk and disorderly.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $537.00 for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.
	Not appealed.

19990804:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct.  Violation of MCB Japan Order 1746.3 by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages under the legal drinking age, drunk and disorderly, and disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer.  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

19991203:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 92:  On or about 0156, 19990924 fail to obey a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages under the legal drinking age.
	Award:  Reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $479.00 for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.
	Not appealed.

19991215:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct; pattern of misconduct.  Specifically on 19990804 you received NJP for underage drinking, drunk and disorderly and disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer.  On 19991203 you received NJP for underage age drinking.  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, and advised being processed for administrative discharge action.

20000215:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 92 (2 specifications):
	Specification 1:  On or about 0500, 20000122, violated a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under the legal drinking age.
	Specification 2:  On or about 0600, 20000123, violated a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under the legal drinking age.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $502.00 for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  Forfeiture suspended for 6 months.
	Not appealed.

20000222:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct.  Alcohol treatment refusal.  For violation of MCO P5300.12A, specifically, for refusing Intensive Outpatient Alcohol Treatment prescribed by Consolidated Substance Abuse Counseling Center on 19991026.  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, and advised being processed for administrative discharge action.

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

19991026:	Counselor, Substance Abuse Counseling Center letter recommended applicant for intensive-outpatient treatment for alcohol dependence, but applicant refused treatment.  [Extracted from Commanding General’s letter dated 20000306.]

Elements of Discharge:  [INVOLUNTARY]

Discharge Process:				
Date Notified:					20000125
Basis for Discharge:				MISCONDUCT DUE TO A 

Least Favorable Characterization:			GENERAL (UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS)*
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:	GENERAL (UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS)*

Record Supports Narrative Reason:			YES
Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 		NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel			
Administrative Board			
Obtain Copies	  			
Submit Statement(s) (date)			

Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date):	  (20000209)
SJA review (date):				
Discharge directed by (date):		COMMANDING GENERAL, III MARINE EXPEDITIONARY FORCE (20000306)
Narrative reason directed:				MISCONDUCT DUE TO A 
Characterization directed:				
Date Applicant Discharged:			20000315

*GENERAL (UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS) IS NOT A PROPER CHARACTERIZATION.  THE SEPARATING AUTHORITY USED THE PROPER TERM AND CHARACTERIZATION. 

Additional Information Considered by Board

Type of documentation submitted by the Applicant and considered by the Board
       
       	Document Type					#Pages
       Related to Period of Service Under Review:
	Service/Medical Record:				13
	Other Period of Service:				0
       Related to Post-Service Period:
	Community Service:				0
	Education:					0
	Employment:					0
	Health/Medical:					0
	Character Statements:				3
	Criminal Records Checks:				0
	Additional Statements from Applicant:		1
        Other Documentation (Describe Below)			0

        Total Number of Pages:				17

Applicant’s Issues, as summarized by the Board:
1.  To be able to rejoin the military.
2.  Change reenlistment code.
3.  Unfair discharge characterization because of immaturity at time of offense.
4.  Post service.

Issues 1 and 2:  The Board determined that these Issues were not issues which can form the basis for relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding this issue. 

Decisional Issues:
The Board accepted Issues 3-4 for consideration.

Issue 3 (Equity). The Applicant contends that his problems were attributed to his immaturity.  While he may feel that this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warning and three nonjudicial punishments (NJP), Article 92 and 134.  Violation of UCMJ Article 92 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied

Issue 4 (Equity).   The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge, may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that 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.  The Applicant provided three character statements as documentation of post-service accomplishments.  The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.  Relief denied. 

The NDRB discovered an error in the notification process to the Applicant in that the Commanding Officer stated on 20000125 that the least favorable and the recommended characterization would be General (under other than honorable conditions).  That is not a characterization of service.  The Commanding Officer’s letter to the Separating Authority on 20000209 correctly stated the recommended characterization as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions and the Separating Authority correctly directed the discharge be characterized as such.  The NDRB noted no prejudice to the Applicant as result of this administrative error.
  
In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  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.

Minority Opinion

None

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 until 31 August 2001, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT.

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.

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, Failure to obey an order, regulation.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe that 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.  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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.”  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.  

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the 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