Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801895
Original file (MD0801895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080910
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)     20031125 - 20040829     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20040830     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20070216      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r M on ths 12 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 39
MOS: 0300
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / 2.0 ( )         Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Period of UA: 20050116 - 20050522 (126 days )
20050527 - 20060308 (285 days)
Total days UA : 411

CONF : 20060310 - 20060426 (47 days)

NJP:
- 20050526 : Article 86 (UA), 20050116 - 20050522 (126 days )
Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

SPCM:
- 20060405 : Art icle 86 (U A), 20050527-20060308 (Apprehended after 285 days)
Sentence : BCD; CONF 70 DAYS FOP

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 :


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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Reenlistment opportunity .
2. Mitigating circumstances .
3. Post service conduct.

Decision


 Date: 20 0 9 0212            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 paragraph concerning , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends clemency should be granted based on the fact his misconduct was due to mitigating circumstances with his family. 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 par ticular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by an NJP and a S PCM for violation of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( U A) on two separate occasions totaling 411 days. This violation is considered a serious offense which is punishable by confinement and a punitive discharge if adjudicated and awarded by a spec ial or general court-martial. The Applicant was referred to a SPCM and subsequently was awarded a Bad Conduct Discharge for his misconduct.

The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this pa rticular case merited clemency. However, the Applicant’s records do not indicate he was declared mentally incompetent and could not differentiate between right or wrong, nor do they indicate he was not responsible for his actions. In reviewing the Applicant’s case the NDRB noted the Applicant went to the Mental Health Clinic in January 2005 due to depression. The Applicant stated he had been experiencing difficulty with the Marine Corps, his father’s drug problem and he was homesick. The Mental Health Staff diagnosed him with adjustment disorder with depressive mood; subsequently the Applicant entered into his first period of extended UA. The Applicant returned and 5 days later entered into another period of extended UA until his apprehension after 285 days. While the NDRB understands his family life may have had some non-traditional stressors within its structure, these problems were not deemed sufficient justification for the misconduct; the Applicant had obligations as a U.S. Marine and failed to react and respond properly to the situation. The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and clemency was not warranted due to mitigating circumstances.

Issue 3: (Clemency) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The NDRB is authorized to consid er post-service factors in consideration if a case warrants clemency . 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 clemency, are co nsidered during Board reviews . Supporting documentation to help support post service clemency 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 clemency will be granted, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct and accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character to justify clemency.

Besides the Applicant’s statement o n the DD Form 293, he provide d two references from relatives on his behalf. Although the Applicant said he has a job with a moving company , the Board determined this does not meet the high standard required to warrant clemency. To warrant clemency, the Appl icant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alo ne does not guarantee clemency . 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 ser vice documentation provided, clemency would be inappropriate. Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. There are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.

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 clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense s he committed.

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 .

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 86 (U A ).


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 | 2007_Marine | MD0701263

    Original file (MD0701263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. 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 that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 01 Sep 2001 until Present. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100763

    Original file (ND1100763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801908

    Original file (MD0801908.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ and civilian violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant feel their post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901294

    Original file (ND0901294.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-SN, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090410 Characterization of Service Received: Narrative Reason for Discharge: Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20030611 - 20030701 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030702 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 20050204...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801641

    Original file (MD0801641.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board acknowledged the Applicant’s misconduct as a significant departure from that expected of a U. S. Marine and determined the characterization of service awarded upon discharge, “Bad Conduct Discharge”, was equitable; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, ” Additional Reviews...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001559

    Original file (ND1001559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901344

    Original file (ND0901344.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201383

    Original file (ND1201383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable, because all charges against him in civilian courts have been expunged.2. Neither the Navy nor the NDRB make the decision as to eligibility nor can the NDRB change a characterization of service to make a former servicemember eligible for VA benefits.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902483

    Original file (MD0902483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary : After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, post-service character references, and the discharge process, 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...