ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080605
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)	20010619 - 20010917  		Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010918	Period of Enlistment:  Years   Months	Date of Discharge: 20031118
Length of Service:   Years    Months  01  Days	  Education Level: 	Age at Enlistment: 	AFQT: 79
MOS: 1371	Highest Rank: 	           Fitness Reports: 
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):	  () /  ()
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  Rifle   

Periods of UA/CONF: UA:  20020909 - 20020916 (8) and 20020925 - 20020926 (4).
                                     CONF:  20021001-20021025 (25 days).

NJPs: 
20030604: Article 92 (Disobeyed orders and consumed alcohol while underage);
                  Article 134 (Disorderly conduct).
                  Awarded:  .  Susp - .

20030829: Article 92 (Disobeyed orders and consumed alcohol while underage);
                  Article 134 (Wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor).
                  Awarded:  .  Susp - .

20030923: Article 91 (Belligerent and disrespectful);
                  Article 92 (Failure to obey regulation), 3 specifications:
-	Broke restriction, 
-	Consumed alcohol, 
-	Wearing improper liberty attire.
                   Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly).
                   Awarded: .  Susp - .

SCMs: 
20021114: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), 2 specifications:
-	20020909 - 20020916 (8 days),
-	20020925-20020928 (4 days)).
                   Article 87 (Missed movement);
                   Article 92 (Failed to obey lawful order), 2 specifications.
                   Sentence:    .
	                   Convening Authority Action:  RIR, FOP

6105 Counselings: 
20030604: For violation of Articles 92 and 134.  On 20030601 you were apprehended by Camp Hansen PMO for
                   underage drinking.  You became belligerent with the MP's and after being placed in hand cuffs in the back
                   of the vehicle, preceded to spit inside the vehicle.  Specific corrective actions provided.

20030829: For misconduct, which resulted in NJP on 20030829.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

	  “(8) 20020909-20020916, (4) 20020925-20020928, 
                               (25) 20021001-20021025”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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): 

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.

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, Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 87 (missed movement), 92 (disobeying orders).

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  Medical condition.
2.  Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date:  20080911	            Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  MISCONDUCT.

Discussion

: ()  .  The Applicant infers his misconduct may be attributed to his anti-social disorder and depression.  While he may feel this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the evidence contained in the available medical records maintained by the Marine Corps provides no indication the Applicant’s mental condition impaired his ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct.  For the Applicant’s edification, the evidence of record shows he was prescribed medication to treat his medical condition and he elected, of his own free will, to stop taking the prescribed medication.  Furthermore, the Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information regarding “Medical Conditions and Misconduct” and how discharge procedures for misconduct take priority over procedures conducted by a medical evaluation board.  The Board determined an upgrade would not be appropriate.      

: ()  .  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 is considered 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.  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; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements.  The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from 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.   

As evidence of post service accomplishments, the Applicant provided statements from character references and employers.  He also provided documentation of an alcohol free lifestyle and non-involvement with local civil authorities.  While the Board commends the Applicant’s post-service accomplishments, it found these efforts did not mitigate the misconduct which caused this discharge.  The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate at this time.

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 

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