Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400976
Original file (MD1400976.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140422
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)       20110816 - 20111114     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20111115     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20130412      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 28 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 74
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle

NJP:

SCM:

- 20121221 :      Article 86 (Absent without leave) 2 specifications
         Specification 1: 20120729 - 20100828, 29 days
         Specification 2: 20120906 - 20121211, 96 days
          Article 87 (Missing movement) 2 specifications
         Specification 1: Missed the movement of Battalion Landing Team 3/2 on 20120729
         Specification 2: Missed the movement of Battalion Landing Team 3/2 on 20120909
         Sentence: (20121221 - 20130113, 24 days)
         CA Action: Sentence approved and ordered executed on 20121221

SPCM:

CIVIL ARREST:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20120828 :      For violation of Articles 86 (Absent without leave) and 87 (Missing movement)

- 20121211 :      For violation of Articles 86 (Absent without leave) and 87 (Missing movement)



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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends that there were pre-service and in-service factors that serve to mitigate his misconduct and should be considered for an upgrade.

Decision


 Date: 20 1 4 1002            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 g overnment al a ffairs 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 6105 counseling warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 2 specifications ), and Article 87 ( Missing movement , 2 specifications ). Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that there were pre-service and in-service factors that serve to mitigate his misconduct and should be considered for an upgrade. The government assumes a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs and the Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. 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 did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate he attempted to use the numerous services available for service members who undergo personal problems during their enlistment, such as the Navy Chaplain, Medical or Mental Health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s personal problems were not mitigating factors in his misconduct.
Furthermore, Although the Applicant was not represented by counsel at his court-martial, on 21 December 2012, the Applicant signed an Agreement for Disposition of Articles 86 and 87 UCMJ Allegations stating, “For good consideration and after consultation with counsel, I agree to enter a voluntary pleas of guilty to the charge and specification indicating in enclosure (1) at Summary Courts-Martial, and waive my right to an Administrative Discharge Board ” . The letter goes in more detail to state t hat the Applicant had a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions. If the Applicant believed there were mitigating circumstances, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made. During his court-martial and at an Administrative Separation Board, he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense against the charges. Instead, the Applicant pled guilty to the charges and waived his right to an administrative board . The Applicant submitted no evidence to support his contention, therefore, the NDRB found that an upgrade would be inappropriate . 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 for additional information.



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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901331

    Original file (ND0901331.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation: From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500968

    Original file (MD1500968.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I understand that waiving my right to an administrative discharge board will likely result in my receiving a discharge Under Other Than Honorable conditions from the Marine Corps.” Regarding the above statement of rights, the NDRB found that the Applicant was not discharged for commission of a serious offense due to his period of unauthorized absence, but for pleading guilty at Summary Court-Martial for Article 87 (Missing movement). Summary: After a thorough review of the available...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801172

    Original file (ND0801172.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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 NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900266

    Original file (ND0900266.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he provided additional references stating his commitment to community service and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901934

    Original file (ND0901934.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of clemency. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee clemency will be granted, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct justifies clemency. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700198

    Original file (ND0700198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issue submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that the Applicant’s diagnosis did not provide grounds for misconduct, clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Whenever a member is being...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900766

    Original file (ND0900766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant feel their post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200571

    Original file (ND1200571.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that relief based on this issue was not warranted. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601034

    Original file (ND0601034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Wrongfully use cocaine on 19920925.19921024: Additional charge referred to special court-martial, to be tried together with charges referred on 19921007.19921029: Applicant to unauthorized absence 2100.30: Applicant missed movement.19921109: Applicant from unauthorized absence 0900 (11 days/surrendered).19921215: Special Court Martial [19921125 and 19921221]: Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: Unauthorized absence 19920812 until on or about 19920923. Whenever a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900982

    Original file (ND0900982.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 from the date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the...