Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000495
Original file (MD1000495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20091130
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)       20010921 - 20011125     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011126     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050512      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 16 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 41
MOS: 3051
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF : UA 20030106-20030109 (3days), CONF 20030401-20030613 (73 days)

NJP: SCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

SPCM:

- 20030401 :       Art icle (Unauthorized absence: 3 days)
         Art icle (False official statement)
         Art icle (Malingering: Intentional , self-inflicted injury )
         Sentence : (8 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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation :           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant desires to reenlist in the military.
2.       The Applicant wishe s to improve his employment opportunities.
3. The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident.
4. The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity at the time mitigate his misconduct.

Decision


 Date: 20 1 1 0113            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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 NDRB 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 Applicant’s record of service included for of the UCMJ: Article 86 ( Unauthorized absence: 3 days , 1 specification ) , Article 107 (False official statement, 1 specification), and Article 115 (Malingering: Intentional, self-inflicted injury, 1specification) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command convened a special court-martial where he pled and was found guilty. The Applicant was sentenced to eight months confinement, reduction to private, and a Bad Conduct d ischarge.

The Applicant provided no documentation for the NDRB’s consideration.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to reenlist in the military. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wishe s to improve his employment 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident. C ertain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Marine Corps in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant was guilty of malingering during a time of war, due to a self - inflicted gunshot wound and making a false official statement as part of a plan to avoid further service in the Marine Corps. Each of these offenses is punishable by a D ishonorable discharge and five years of confinement. Considering the gravity of the offen s es as well as the premeditated and deceitful manner in which the Applicant’s plan was carried out, the NDRB found the Marine Corps was lenient in its punishment. Further, in the Applicant’s statement to the NDRB, he claims his self - inflicted wound was an accident and his subsequent false statement to a police officer that he was attacked by gang members was the result of panicking. This directly contradicts his sworn statements and testimony during special court-martial proceedings where the Applicant detailed his premeditated plan as well as his free and voluntary execution of misconduct he knew to be wrongful . The NDRB found the Applicant’s issue to be disingenuous and without merit . Clemency denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity at the time mitigate his misconduct. T he record clearly reflects that the Applicant was responsible for his actions when he engaged in the misconduct of record . Furth er, the record reflects premeditated and willful misconduct . The NDRB found the Applicant’s youth or age did not mitigate his misconduct of record. Clemency denied.

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 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 .

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 .


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 Disable d 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002095

    Original file (MD1002095.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Due to the serious, repeated nature of the Applicant’s misconduct, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002240

    Original file (MD1002240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Marine Corps regulations direct that members notified of intended recommendation for discharge while in an entry level status (within the first 180 days of enlistment) receive an Uncharacterized characterization of service except in circumstances where service has been so meritorious that an Honorable is clearly 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301225

    Original file (MD1301225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the discovery of the Applicant’s fraudulent entry into the military, command administratively processed for separation.The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801468

    Original file (ND0801468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Applicant provided limited documentation of post service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800650

    Original file (ND0800650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record reflects the Commander, Naval Medical Center, San Diego notified the Applicant of his proposed administrative processing by reason of misconduct due to the civilian conviction and commission of a serious offense. Based on the evidence contained in the record, the Board determined the Applicant received proper notice of administrative separation processing and was provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative board, but waived that right, thus accepting the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200667

    Original file (MD1200667.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving an act that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901136

    Original file (MD0901136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100937

    Original file (ND1100937.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400046

    Original file (ND1400046.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900862

    Original file (ND0900862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.While the Board appreciates the strong character references provided that indicate the Applicant is more mature, married with children, and has...