ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20090911
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)	20040609 - 20050605  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20050606	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20080514	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  13  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  67
MOS:  0331
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):  /2.2	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle   

Periods of CONF: 20060315-20060408, 24 days
                              20060825-20061213, 111 days

Lost time per DD214:  20060127-20060303, 36 days
                                     20060424-20060728, 95 days 
 
NJP:  

SCM:  

-Mar 2005:  	Article 86 (Absent from Unit 20060127-20060303, 36 days)
    	Sentence: Details not found in record; however, record reflects a corresponding period of adjudicated confinement for 24 Days (20060315-20060408)

SPCM:  

- 20060929:	Article  (Absent from unit 20060424-20060728, 95 days)
	Sentence:   CONF 120 days (20060825-20061213, 111 days)  

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:		Substance Abuse:		Criminal Records:	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:		References:	
	Additional Statements:
		From Applicant:		From Representation:		From Congress member:	

	Other Documentation:	

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.

C.  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.	Nondecisional issue:  Applicant requests change in characterization of service from Bad Conduct Discharge to General, Under Honorable Conditions along with a corresponding change in RE-code in order to re-enlist in the Marine Corps.

2.	Decisional issue: (Clemency) Applicant contends that he was too young to understand the gravity of his situation at the time and his misconduct was a youthful indiscretion that he regrets; Applicant seeks the opportunity to correct his errors.  

Decision

Date:  20100917		Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

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

Discussion

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.  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 completed a thorough review of the record of trial by Special Court-Martial, the Navy and Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals legal review, and the Naval Clemency and Parole Board review.  Additionally, the Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity.

The Applicant’s record of service included no 6105 retention counseling warnings and a Summary Court-Martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave – absenting himself from his unit for a period of 36 days until surrendering himself to military authority).  The Applicant’s service record was further marred by a Special Court-Martial conviction for violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ: specifically, that the Applicant absented himself from his unit for approximately 95 days and did so remain absent until apprehended by civilian authorities.  The severity of the Applicant’s unauthorized absence was further compounded by missing his unit combat deployment to OPERATION Iraqi Freedom 05-07 (OIF 05-07).     

:  (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade in his characterization of service in order to re-enlist and continue to serve his country.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other branch of the Armed Forces, and is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to reenlistment codes.  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.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends that he was too young to understand the gravity of his situation at the time of his misconduct; it was a youthful indiscretion that he now regrets.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency; clemency being an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  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 determined that the Applicant's youth or age was not a mitigating factor in his misconduct.  The Applicant had successfully completed both Marine Corps Recruit Training and the School of Infantry and had successfully checked into his Fleet Marine Force Infantry Battalion, filling a critical billet as a machine-gunner preparing for deployment to Iraq.  The Applicant’s periods of absence caused him to miss his unit’s combat deployment to Iraq, leaving the unit with a gap in its planned employment.  Despite a Marine’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  Although the command could have pursued an administrative separation, the length of the unauthorized absence, compounded by missing the unit deployment to Iraq, led the command to pursue a punitive discharge through a Special Court-Martial instead of the more lenient administrative separation process.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Court-Martial proceedings, Discharge Process, and personal statement submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted.  The sentence awarded the Applicant at his Special Court-Martial was appropriate for the offense committed.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,  record entries, and the basic Record of Trial by Special Court-Martial, 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, Automatic Upgrades, 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 Disabled 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