Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500435
Original file (MD1500435.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20141231
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Reenlistment Code:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:
         Reentry Code change to: NONE REQUESTED

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USMCR (DEP)      20080201 - 20080309     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080310    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: 4 Years 0 Months
Date of Discharge: 20100302     Highest Rank:
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 08 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 22
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): / Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle

Periods of CONF: 20080925-20081112 (45 days)

NJP:     SCM:

SPCM:

- 20081113:      Article 2 Specifications
         Specification 1: On or about 20080828 until on or about 20080907 (11 days)
         Specification 2: On or about 20080909 until on or about 20080924 (15 days)
         Article Wrongfully traveling to Mexico while in a student status at SOI
         Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances) Marijuana
         Article For the purpose of private financial gain, wrongfully attempt to bring aliens unto the U.S., knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that aliens had not received prior official authorization to enter or reside in the U.S. which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
         Sentence: CONF 4 Months
         CA: Approved and executed confinement in excess of time already served is suspended for a period of 12 months from the date of trial, at which time, unless sooner vacated the suspended part of the sentence will be remitted without further action.

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20080924:      Charges: Illegal transport of aliens (3)

CC:

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

Types of Witnesses Who Testified


         Expert:           Character:      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , 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 IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .




























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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant wants an upgrade of his discharge for better employment opportunities, or to reenlist.
2.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade of his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions).

Decision


Date: 20150604           Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

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 for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave; 2 specifications of 11 days, and 15 days), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; travel to Mexico while a student at School of Infantry), Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances; marijuana), and Article 134 (General article; conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces). The Court sentenced the Applicant to Bad Conduct Discharge, and confinement for four months.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants an upgrade of his discharge for better employment opportunities, or to reenlist. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or reenlistment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade of his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions). The Applicant reported to School of Infantry (SOI) on 18 June 2008 and began his first period of eleven days of unauthorized absence (UA) on 28 August to 7 September 2008. One day after returning to SOI, the Applicant again went UA on 9 September until he was arrested by civilian authorities on 24 September 2008 on charges of three counts of illegal transportation of illegal aliens. The Applicant was returned to military control and found guilty at a SPCM of UA, use of marijuana, wrongfully traveling to Mexico, and wrongfully attempting to bring illegal aliens into the United States for financial gain. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a personal statement, evidence of employment as a truck driver, and two character references. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB found the evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. 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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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 | 2014_Marine | MD1401254

    Original file (MD1401254.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500344

    Original file (MD1500344.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102088

    Original file (MD1102088.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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 establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration.During the Applicant’s 1 year, 5 months, and 17 days of service, he was found guilty of two serious...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902247

    Original file (MD0902247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. For additional information, call 1-877-222-VETS (8387).This case was processed and adjudicated in accordance with Section 512 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801785

    Original file (MD0801785.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion Issues 1-2: () .The Applicant contends the separation authority considered his pre-service drug use and additional alleged positive urinalysis when determining his characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. As for the issue regarding characterization, the Commander’s letter (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION PROCEEDING IN THE CASE OF PRIVATE P. A. C.USMC), Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, states, “In evaluating...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002050

    Original file (MD1002050.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000863

    Original file (ND1000863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600829

    Original file (MD0600829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB noted that the Applicant’s bad conduct discharge, received at court-martial, had been previously remitted by the Naval Clemency and Parole Board (NCPB), and recognized that the NDRB’s review was based on the characterization of service that the Applicant actually received. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500827

    Original file (MD1500827.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801944

    Original file (MD0801944.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, medical records that are presumed to be his mother’s, written statement of post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...