Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801944
Original file (MD0801944.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080924
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)      20031002 - 20040111     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20040112      Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20061113       H ighest Rank:
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 02 D ay(s)
 Education Level:         AFQT: 61
MOS: 9900
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): ( ) / 1.8 (NFIR)    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle

Periods of CONF: 20050527-20050731 (66 days)
NJP: SCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling:

SPCM:
- 20050801 :      Article 86 (UA) 20040420-20050525 (399 days, 22 hours, 24 minutes)
          Sentence: BCD CONF FOR 6 MOS FOP
         CA Action: 20051114 The sentence is approved and except for BCD, ordered executed, but execution of that part of the sent extending to confinement in excess of 80 days is suspended for a period of 12 months.

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:






DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
Applicant’s Issues

 1. Seeking to reenlist in the Armed Forces.
2. Went UA to care for his mother.

Decision

Date: 20090430            Location: Washington D.C.        R epresentation :

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

 : The Applicant is seeking an upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) in order to qualify for reenlistment in the Armed Forces. 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 , for additional information regarding .

 : ( ) . In seeking clemency, the Applicant contends he went UA in order to help care for his ill mother. The Applicant further contends since the time of discharge, he has carried a great burden because of this mistake. 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. The record of evidence, Report of Return of Absentee signed 27 May 2005, reflects the Applicant was apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control on 25 May 2005 after being UA for 399 days. Subsequently, he admitted guilt and consistent with his plea, was convicted at a SPCM for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86. Pursuant to Special Court-Martial Supplemental Order No. 06-0691 of 3 August 2006, a bad conduct discharge was ordered to be executed.

In response to the Applicant’s issue, 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. 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. The awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade based on clemency would be inappropriate.

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

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 .


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 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 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 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900798

    Original file (MD0900798.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he is entitled to clemency because his misconduct was based “on one incident out of four years and eight months of honorable service with no other adverse actions ” and he had turned himself in.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 NDRB specifically advises the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801433

    Original file (ND0801433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board acknowledges the misconduct of the Applicant and determined the awarded characterization was appropriate; an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700076

    Original file (MD0700076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s recordthe Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense he committed.3 ().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 the service. ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800099

    Original file (ND0800099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Request the Board’s relief with an up-grade of his characterization of service based on clemency. By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion Issue 1 () The Applicant request the Board’s relief with an up-grade of his characterization of service based on clemency. The Applicant claims he made the decision to enter into an unauthorized absence (UA) status when he was told he would not be able to have elective surgery to remove the mass on a scheduled date due to the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901158

    Original file (MD0901158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall Misconduct.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. ” 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 ofthe Applicant’sdate of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900352

    Original file (ND0900352.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901026

    Original file (MD0901026.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 COURT-MARTIAL.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.The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901670

    Original file (ND0901670.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant received NJP for violation of Article 112a and was processed for administrative separation.The Applicant submitted to the NDRB documentation confirming that his mother was injured and incapacitated. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801246

    Original file (MD0801246.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901413

    Original file (MD0901413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant would like his RE code upgraded so he can reenlist. While the Applicant’s request for a discharge was considered inappropriate due to the nature of his in-service conduct, the board did find an upgrade from Bad Conduct to Under Other Than Honorable Conditions to be most appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded...