ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20080507
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  Homosexual Conduct
Authority for Discharge:  MARCORSEPMAN 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:  
			Narrative Reason change to: 

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)	20060501 - 20060515  		Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20060516		   Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months		Date of Discharge:  20061218
Length of Service:    Yrs    Mths  02  Dys	Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  71
MOS:  0311  	Highest Rank:   			Fitness Reports:  
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): 4.2/4.2 (NFIR)
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  Rifle: MM, Pistol: , GWOTSM, NDSM.

Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJPs:	

SCMs:	

SPCMs:	

CC:	

6105 Counseling: 

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:  

	- Letter of support from Congresswoman C. S-P., U.S. House of Representative dated 24 April 2008.

Other Documentation (Describe): 
-  Separation/Travel Pay Certificate dated 18 DEC 2006.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Propriety.
2. Post service conduct.

Decision

Date:  20080711		Location:  Washington D.C.	 Representation:  

By a vote of   the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of   the Narrative Reason shall  Homosexual Conduct.

Discussion

: ()  .  The Applicant suggests his discharge was improper because he was advised to "go through the motions" in order to get out of his command faster for fear of further hazing and harassment based on allegations he engaged in homosexual conduct.  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.  There is no evidence in the Applicant's record, nor was any provided by the Applicant, to suggest he was inappropriately advised by his command or harassed based on homosexual conduct.  Furthermore, the Board noted the Applicant voluntarily provided a written statement on 01 December 2006 in which he admitted to engaging in homosexual acts.  In accordance with established Navy and Marine Corps procedures the Applicant was processed for an administrative separation based on this admittance with a General discharge.  The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ()  .  The Applicant does not recant his homosexual admittance, but clarifies his homosexual conduct was experimental and he is no longer engaged in a homosexual lifestyle; he states he is now in a committed relationship.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides 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, 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.   The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing.  For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of a drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  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.  The Board again determined an upgrade or change would be inappropriate.

For the edification of the Applicant, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code; only the Board of Corrections of Naval Records can make a change to the reenlistment code.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum page, specifically the paragraph concerning Reenlistment/RE-codes for further details.  

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 

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16F), effective 01 Sep 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6207, HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT.

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, 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