Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800929
Original file (MD0800929.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080325
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)     19830926- 19840327                Active: 19840328 -19870615
 USMC 1 9870615 -19900928
 USMC 19900928 -19950621
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 199 00928               Period of enlistment : 6 Years Months            Date of Discharge: 19950621
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 25 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 80
MOS: 6093        Highest Rank:             Fitness reports:
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA / CONF : 30 days (date unknown)

NJPs :     NONE

S CMs :   

SPCMs:  
         19940119 : Art. 92 ( W rongful use of gov ’t vehicle) ;
Art 108 ( D amage to gov ’t property) ;
Art 111 ( O perating a vehicle while drunk).
                  Sentence – Red to E-5 ; Conf for 30 days.

CC:      

6105 Counseling :
19941116: For possessing an expired military ID card.
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 Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)

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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Upgrade characterization .
 2. Reenlistment/employment opportunities .
3 . Post s ervice conduct.

Decision


 Date : 20 08 0627             Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall Conduct T riable B y C ourts- M artial ( R equest F or D ischarge F or T he Good O f T he S ervice).

Discussion

 (Equity) : RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant is requesting an upgrade to his characterization of discharge .
 The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and/or the reason for discharge , if such change is warranted. During Board reviews the government is presumed to conduct its affairs with regularity unless there is substantial credible evidence, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant, to rebut the presumption. The Applicant claims his biggest attributes prior to this incident which caused his discharge were his honest y and integrity. However, his record does not support this statement. The Applicant’s service record is marred by two non-judicial punishments, three separations counseling’s and a Special Courts-Martial conviction. In his statement, t he Applicant admi ts serious wrong doing but does not provide mitigating circ umstances for his behavior, saying simply he should have “listened to his heart” vice “outside sources” when he ma de the false official statement to NIS concerning a sexual affair. After a review of the Applicant’s record and documents received t he Board determined an upgrade was not warranted.

Issue 2: The Applicant desires to become a recruiter for the National Guard, a military Chaplain or a civil servant supporting service men and women. This is an Issue which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or one that the Board does not have the authority to grant to relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs concerning Employment/Educational Opportunities and Reenlistment/RE-codes.

Issue 3 (Equity): . The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that 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 states since his discharge he has participated in missionary work overseas, is a member of the local Red Cross, attends church, and coaches sports. However, he did not provide one reference letter or documentation of any kind to support claims of his post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts nee d to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. 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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. The Board determined the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharg e and an upgrade was not warranted.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found




Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A Ma rine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, . (MCOP 1900.16D) ., effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95 Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, .

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 and confinement for up to 5 years.if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 107 .



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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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 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 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.

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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201583

    Original file (MD1201583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700529

    Original file (ND0700529.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found that the Applicant's undocumented claims of good post service conduct did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.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. Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101462

    Original file (ND1101462.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200171

    Original file (ND1200171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: NONE 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801592

    Original file (ND0801592.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701136

    Original file (MD0701136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Susp - ,.19910830: Art 86. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Court-Martial proceedings, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenseshe committed. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800852

    Original file (ND0800852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Applicant provided no post service documentation and his statements alone concerning his post-service conduct were not considered valid documentation. The Board determined an upgrade based on this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001278

    Original file (ND1001278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service record documents a prior period of active duty enlistment in which the Applicant received an Honorable Discharge certificate and was transferred to the U.S. Navy Reserve. Summary : After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall , but the narrative reason for separation shall remainHOMOSEXUAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901198

    Original file (ND0901198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801123

    Original file (ND0801123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...