ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20080422
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)	19940923 - 19950821  		Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19950822	Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months	Date of Discharge:  19980609
Length of Service:    Yrs    Mths  18  Dys	Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  
MOS:  5811      Highest Rank:        Fitness Reports:       AFQT:  41
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):	   () /  ()
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  NDSM OSR Rifle  Pistol  

NJPs:	
19961206:  Article 78 (Accessory after the fact), Having knowledge that C. and N. had stolen property belonging to
                   Wakayama, Sekiyo (gas station), did in order to hinder the CID investigation conceal the theft of the gas
                    station attendant’s uniforms and an undetermined amount of Yen,
                   Article  81 (Conspiracy), Conspired with LCpl’s A. and M., USMC, to say nothing about the theft from the
                   Wakayama, Sekiyo (gas station) and the fact that LCpl L. was involved in hiding the stolen property.  
                   Awarded:  .  Susp - .

6105 Counseling: 
19961206: For alcohol related incident, specifically on 19961005, while under the influence of alcohol was an
                  accessory after the fact, and did participate in a conspiracy to conceal the theft of Japanese gas station
                  attendant uniform items and yen from the Wakayama, Sekiyo (gas station). 

19980129: For lack of judgment and maturity by self-incapacitation for the performance of duties through prior 
                  wrongful indulgence of illegally prescribed drugs.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:	DD 214:  	Service and/or Medical Record:  		Other Records:  

Related to Post-Service Period:	
	Employment:			Finances:			Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Substance Abuse:			Criminal Records:	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:  		References:  		
Additional Statements From Applicant:  		From Representation:  		From Member of Congress:  
Other Documentation (Describe) 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. Desires upgrade of discharge characterization based on post service conduct.
2. Discharge should have been medical for personality disorder.

Decision

Date:  20080821		Location:  Washington D.C.	 Representation:  

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  MISCONDUCT DUE TO MINOR DISCIPLINARY INFRACTIONS.

Discussion

: ()  .  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides 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.  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.  Supporting documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; 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 company’s, or other financial institutions; character witness statements; 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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. 

The Applicant did not provide any supporting documentation or character witness statements as verification of post service accomplishments for the Board to consider in support of his request for an upgrade.  The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing.  For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record; documentation of community or church service; evidence of a drug free existence; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability; and character statements from references.   The Board determined an upgrade or change would be inappropriate at this time.   

: ()      The Applicant provides a copy of a medical report written by Lt. S., USN, Psychology Department, Navy Hospital Cherry Point (NHCP), NC which states the Applicant appears psychologically unsuited for continued military service.  At the time of this medical report, the Applicant was already being processed for an administrative separation for a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions.  He claims his service was generally good but in fact it was marred by one non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violation of Articles 78 and 81 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and one retention warning for use of illegal prescription drugs.  These UCMJ violations, accessory after the fact and conspiracy, are especially disturbing, considering the Applicant’s Military Occupational Specialty was Military Police and Law Enforcement.  Additionally, it was noted at the time of his psychological evaluation, the Applicant was also awaiting NJP for a period of unauthorized absence.  DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation from occurring even when separation for other reasons (i.e., medical) may appear likely; appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons (i.e., medical).  The Applicant is referred to the ADDENDUM, specifically the paragraph concerning Medical Conditions and Misconduct for further information.  However, it should be noted the Applicant was not in the process of being discharged for medical reasons or under medical review by a Performance Evaluation Board and his misconduct preempted any evaluation by the Psychology Department at NHCP.  The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.   

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,  Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 January 1997 until 31 August 2001

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 78 and 81.

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 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:  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 or is referred to a court-martial 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 other medical related reasons.”  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 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 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