Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000790
Original file (MD1000790.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100127
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)       20020717 - 20021229     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021230     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20061227      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 28 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 47
MOS: 2147
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2) LoA (2) CoA

Periods of UA / CONF : 20060324-20060327 ( 4 days ) /

NJP:     SCM:     SPCM:   

C ivilian Arrest:          The Applicant was arrested by civilian authorities on suspicion of theft of several motorcy c les and was also being strongly implicated in running a “chop shop” at his residence. Based on the preponderance of the evidence, his command involuntary discharged him prior to the end of his obligated service.

Retention Warning Counseling :

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. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective 1 September 2001 until Present, 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, Artic le 121 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code.
 2 . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because the civilian charges against him were dismissed.

Decision

Date: 20110331 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . The 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 the Applicant being arrested by civilian authorities on suspicion of theft of several motorcycles and was also being strongly implicated in running a “chop shop” at his residence. Based on the preponderance of the evidence, his command involuntary discharged him prior to the end of his obligated service. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, but waived his rights to submit a written statement for considerati on by the separating authority and to request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because the civilian charges against him were dismissed. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction; however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. The statements and documents provided by the Applicant do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case. Per the documents sent by the Applicant, it appears that C ount 2 of receiving known stolen property (over $400) is still valid. Furthermore, t he fact that charges were dismissed does not mean that the Applicant is not guilty of any wrongdoing, only that the prosecut or chose not to proceed with the case. Dismissed does not mean acquittal. The Applicant was provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative board, but waived that right, thus accepting the discharge recommended in the letter of notification. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. 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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Reenlistment/RE-code and Post-Service Conduct .



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), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1300171

    Original file (MD1300171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 July 2012, an Administrative Separation Board determined by a vote of 3-0 that a preponderance of evidence supported the charges of misconduct, that the Applicant should be administratively separated, and that the Applicant’s characterization of service should be 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101369

    Original file (ND1101369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to further his service in the National Guard.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301041

    Original file (ND1301041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was based on errors of fact and law.2. As the Applicant’s service record contains no other evidence of negative aspects of performance or conduct, and as the narrative reason for separation has been proved by a preponderance of evidence to be in error, the NDRB determined the Applicant should be granted full relief with an Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400581

    Original file (ND1400581.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080731 - 20080921Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080922Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20100604Highest Rank/Rate:MMFALength of Service:YearMonths14 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 44EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500690

    Original file (MD1500690.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801044

    Original file (ND0801044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflected a significant departure from the conduct expected of an officer and the awarded characterization was appropriate; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101729

    Original file (ND1101729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301447

    Original file (MD1301447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Full relief to Honorable was not granted due to the Applicant’s in-service misconduct.Summary: After a careful review of the Applicant’s post-service documentation and official service records, and the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001981

    Original file (ND1001981.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200339

    Original file (MD1200339.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administrative board determined that misconduct was supported by a preponderance of the evidence and recommended separation 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 upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...