Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100088
Original file (MD1100088.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101013
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)       19950623 - 19951112     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19951113     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20000131      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 19 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 48
MOS: 6541
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM

Period s of UA/ CONF :      CONF 19970610 - 19970704 (25 days)       UA 19971001 - 19971104 (34 days, surrendered)
                           CONF 19980211 - 19980429 (79 days)       UA 19980127 - 19980129 (3 days ) 

NJP: 1
- 19970605 :      Article 108 (Military property of the United States - waste, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition, damage to government quarters by pushing his wife and making a hole in the wall , 19970527 )
         Article 128 (Assault, physical confrontation with his wife by pushing her into a wall , 19970527 )
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EPD Suspended:

SCM:
- 19970610 :       Article 112a (Wrongful use , possession , etc. of controlled substances , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Wrongful use of marijuana , o/o 19961209-19961216
         Specification 2: Wrongful possession of marijuana on board MCAS Cherry Point , o/o 19970311
         Sentence : R IR (to E-1) CONF 30 days (19970610 - 19970704, 25 days) FOP Suspended: FOP (6 months)

SPCM: 1
- 19980211 :       Art icle 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 19971001 - 1997110 5 , surrendered, 34 days )
         Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substance, marijuana , o/o 19970507-19970606 )
         Article 128 (Assault, kicking a L ance C orporal in the head , 19980124)
          Sentence : FOP CONF 100 days ( 19980211- 19980429, 79 days) BCD

CC: NONE

Retention Warning Counseling : 2

- 19960501 :       For not being within Marine Corps w eight s tandards , IAW MCO 6100.10B .
- 19970811 :       For driving on a suspended driver’s license .



Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB note d an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

          Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ RIFLE MARKSMAN, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, MERITORIOUS MAST ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.
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 :        

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 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       Applicant requests a discharge upgrade based on clemency.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0 2 09            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation : 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 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 identified one decisional issue for the Board’s consideration. The Applicant’s record of service included two 6105 counseling retention warnin gs, one non judicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 108 ( Military property of the United States - waste, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition, damage to government quarters by pushing his wife and making a hole in the wall , 27 May 1997 ) , Article 128 (Assault, physical confrontation with his wife by pushing her into a wall , 27 May 1997 ) , and one S ummary C ourt- M artial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of a controll ed substance , 2 specifications : Wrongful use of marijuana between 9-16 Dec 1996 and w rongful possession of marijuana on board MCAS Cherry Point o/o 11 Mar 1997 ) . The record also reflected one S pecial C ourt- M artial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 1 Oct 1997 -5 Nov 2007 , 34 days , terminated by his surrender ), Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substance, marijuana , between 7 May-6 Jun 1997 ), and Article 128 (Assault, kicking a L ance C orporal in the head on 24 Jan 1998 ). The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, and acknowledged his complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 23 Jun 1995. Based on the serious and repeated offenses committed by the Applicant, his command referred him for trial by Special Court - Martial. The Applicant was found guilty at Special Court-Martial o f violating UCMJ Articles 86, 112a, and 128 and was awarded a B ad C onduct D ischarge. After completion of the appellate review process, the Applicant was separated from the Marine Corps on 31 Jan 2000 with a Bad Conduct Discharge due to Court - Martial.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant requests a discharge upgrade based on clemency. 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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, m edical and s ervice r ecord e ntries, c ourt- m artial proceedings, and the d ischarge p rocess, 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. The Applicant exhibited repetitive, serious misconduct during his short period of service and was deserving of the Bad Conduct Discharge. Clemency denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the punitive discharge separation 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 for additional information.


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 | 2008_Marine | MD0800834

    Original file (MD0800834.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements:From Applicant:From Representation: From Congress member: Other Documentation:VA disability, IRS performance awards, Resume of employment and school DEPARTMENT OF THE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301101

    Original file (MD1301101.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MDD13-01101 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT APPLICANT’S ISSUES 1. The Applicant was convicted at a Special Court-Martial and was separated from the Marine Corps with a Bad Conduct Discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001603

    Original file (MD1001603.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002352

    Original file (MD1002352.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities as regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100629

    Original file (MD1100629.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. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000240

    Original file (MD1000240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB is not authorized to change the reentry code as requested by the Applicant nor upgrade the characterization of service at discharge solely to facilitate re-enlistment;as such, no relief warranted. Furthermore, based on this review, and the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the Board determined that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was equitable and that relief on the basis of clemency was not warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001963

    Original file (MD1001963.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that clemency was not 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 of the Applicant’s date of discharge. If a former...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100694

    Original file (ND1100694.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001502

    Original file (ND1001502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Convening Authority took action on the adjudged sentence on 15 September 2003, specifying, “ Except for the Bad Conduct Discharge, the sentence is approved and will be executed .” Based on a review of the record of trial and all supporting documentation, the NDRB determined that the Convening Authority intended to state that “ The Sentence is approved, and except for the Bad Conduct Discharge, will be executed .” Not noticing the error in the Convening Authority’s specified actions, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100220

    Original file (ND1100220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE 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...