Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700653
Original file (MD0700653.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-LCPL, USMCR
MD07-00653    
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070417      Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Wrongfully discharged on criminal charges that were charged and filed but never adjudicated.
                           2. Unfairly treated by unit.

Decision

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

Date: 20 071120 Location: Washington D.C.         Representation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 (Equity). A Marine may be separated for a commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation. A military or civilian conviction is not required for discharge under this provision. Additionally, w hen 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 conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by accusations of criminal misrepresentation and wrongdoing. The Applicant’s own supporting documents outline the accusations and charges culminating with the fact that the Applicant reimbursed the NYC Police Department for misappropriated time. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

Issue 2 (Equity). The Applicant implies that he was treated unfairly by his unit. 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 that the command unfairly singled him out for discipline. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

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, Medical and Service Record Entries , Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found that


Summary of Service

 Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19980417 - 19980601         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19980602      Years Contracted : 8 ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20060416
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 10 Mths 19 D ys        Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 19     AFQT: 32              MOS: 3381 Highest Rank: SGT
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): Fitness reports :
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): PUC, NDSM, AFRM w "M", RIFLE EXPERT BADGE

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 19980528:        Applicant signs statement of understanding concerning the six/two contract in the USMCR.

20050518:        Applicant transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve and not required to attend any further drills.


Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   20060207
Basis for Discharge:      DUE TO
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20070223      
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
SJA review (date):       ( 20060322 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING GENERAL, MARINE CORPS MOBILIZATION COMMAND ( 20060324 )
Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20060416      


Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

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

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 01 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 .



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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800138

    Original file (MD0800138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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) -Divorce decree 20061121 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800034

    Original file (MD0800034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20000621 - 20000730 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000731Period of enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge: 20030530Length of Service: Yrs Mths07 Dys Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 49MOS: 3381 Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 3.7(6)/3.5(6) Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700481

    Original file (MD0700481.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service.2. Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge 20041206: Applicant to unauthorized status. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100716

    Original file (MD1100716.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined that the diagnosis and separation for Personality Disorder was proper.Marine Corps regulations state the characterization of service for a Marine separated for Personality Disorder is either Honorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions) as determined by the Marine’s service record. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901687

    Original file (MD0901687.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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200973

    Original file (MD1200973.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory.When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800057

    Original file (MD0800057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An upgrade to General under honorable conditions would be inappropriate.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, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the ” Additional Reviews...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200027

    Original file (MD1200027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800137

    Original file (MD0800137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700729

    Original file (ND0700729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board also noted that the Separation Authority discharged the Applicant for the reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct when the Applicant was notified of, and his administrative discharge board found, misconduct – commission of a serious offense. The Board determined that the Applicant was not prejudiced by being afforded an administrative discharge board or by the clerical error in the Separation Authority’s action.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the...