Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801770
Original file (MD0801770.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080818
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)      19890211 - 19890423      Active:            19890424 - 19891016
                                    (ANG US )         19911210 - 19941127

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19941128     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19980122      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 25 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
MOS: 5811 (Military Police)
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol AFAM AFTR

Periods of CONF : 19950921 – 19951205 ( 75 days)

NJP: SCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling:

SPCM:
- 19951121 : Article 80 (Attempt to possess cocaine)
Sentence: BCD CONF FOR 5 MONTHS FOP RIR TO E-1

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 Representat ion :   From Congress member :

Other Documentation : Letter from the Archbishop




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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Service Benefits
2. Employment Opportunities
3 . Record of Service/Post-Service

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 0416            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL .
Discussion

 : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraphs concerning and regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends the incidents leading up to his court-martial were without merit and could be considered a border-line hazing incident. Despite a Marine’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. 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. 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. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service was marred b y a S PCM for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 (Attempts , to possess a controlled substance – c ocaine ) . This is serious offense, especially when take n into account the Applicant was a member of the Military Police and that he tried to buy drugs. The Board determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflected a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Marine and the awarded characterization was appropriate at the time of discharge.

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. 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 help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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; attending 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 an additional 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 o n the DD Form 293, he provide d service-related documents, unofficial college transcripts, references from his employer (B&R Glass) and a letter from the Archbishop (Archdiocese of Saint Mary) and a West Haven Police Program showing he received a Civilian Certificate of Commendation for quick action which prevented a robbery and the apprehension of the perpetrator. Additionally, the Applicant ’ s heroics were recognized with a letter from the Mayor of West Haven. The Board applauds your efforts to keep your community safe and in seek ing higher education to better yourself.


The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his characterization to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”. For the edification of the Applicant, a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. A discharge “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the naval service. The Board considered the Applicant’s post-service efforts and determined clemency warranted to upgrade his characterization from a “Bad Conduct” to “Under Other Than Honorable.”

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed; however, based on his post service actions clemency was warranted and an upgrade to “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” was approved.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 until 31 August 2001.

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 .

D. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ: Article 80 (Attempts: to possess a controlled substance - Cocaine).


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 or is referred to a court-martial fo r 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900428

    Original file (MD0900428.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined clemency is not warranted based on the member’s record of service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the sentence awarded the Applicant at her court-martial was appropriate for the offensesshe committed, but she should receive an upgrade to her discharge as an act of clemency based on post service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900607

    Original file (MD0900607.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, 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 offenses he committed. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800683

    Original file (ND0800683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Applicant is advised 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 warrants clemency. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801915

    Original file (MD0801915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant did not provided any documentation or evidence in support of his request and the Board determined that clemency would be inappropriate. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “ Bad Conduct Discharge”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided, clemency would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901288

    Original file (ND0901288.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-ETSR, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090409 Characterization of Service Received: Narrative Reason for Discharge: (SERIOUS OFFENSE) Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20050126 - 20050608 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20050609 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400731

    Original file (ND1400731.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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801545

    Original file (MD0801545.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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, t ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002243

    Original file (MD1002243.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801157

    Original file (MD0801157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Applicant is advised 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 warrants clemency. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701074

    Original file (ND0701074.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.