Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101081
Original file (MD1101081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110322
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)       20000907 - 20010610     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20010611     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060 306      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 63
MOS: 3051
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Lost time per DD214: 20040321-20040615, 84 days

NJP:

- 20030512 :       Article (Unauthorized absence 0530 to 0700 from Armory and Detachment Hump)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20030819 :       Article (Unauthorized absence from 0545 PT on 20030730, and did not show up until 0800)
         Awarded : Susp ended: Vacated 20040209

SCM:     CC:

SPCM:

- 20040513 :       Art icle (Unauthorized absence, 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failed to go at time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 20040420, Combat Service Support Detachment 21 staff duty officer’s office.
         Specification 2: Failed to go at time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: 2200 20040223, Combat Service Support Detachment 21 staff duty officer’s office.
         Specification 3: Failed to go at time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 20040315, Combat Service Support Detachment 21 staff duty officer’s office.
          Art icle (Assault a noncommissioned officer in the execution of his duties)
         Article 92 (Failed to obey a lawful order , to wit: Military Protective Order, dated 200413, to remain 1,000 feet from Ms K__ J___.)
         Article 128 (Assault, grabbing Ms K_ J_ by the ankle with his hands)
         Article 134 (Breaking restrictions, 2 specifications )
         Sentence : CONF 7 months (Pre-trial CONF: 20040321-20040512, 53 days)


Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20020822 :       For violation of Article 86, unauthorized absence, in that on 20020715 and 20020717 at 0700, I fail ed to report to Section PT and to be at a Detachment Hump .

- 20021018 :       For disobeying Marine Corps Regulation on August 13, 2002. I was late for work. I was supposed to open up the armory at 0500 to pass out weapons to the rifle range. I did not show up until 0645.

- 20030805 :       For violation Article 86, on or about 20030730 I was UA from Detachment PT at 0545, and I did not come to work until 0800.

- 20031022 :       For judgment in the line of duty, specifically entering a female’s room unwelcome and not advising the DNCO or SDNCO of any problem.

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 P1900.16F), 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 .




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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant desires to become eligible for the GI Bill.
2 .       Post-service conduct .

Decision

Date : 2012 06 07             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 discharg e 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’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings , for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( , ) , and for of the UCMJ: Article ( , ), Article ( Assault a non-commissioned officer in the execution of his duties , ), Article ( , ), Article ( , ), and Article ( Article , : Breaking restriction ). Based on the Applicant’s convicti on at S pecial C ourt- M artial, and following confinement and appellant review, he was separated with a Bad Conduct Discharge.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to become eligible for the GI Bill. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 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. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational o pportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant requested the NDRB consider post - service conduct as a basis to gain a more thorough understanding of performance and conduct during the period of service under review. The Applicant submitted an associate’s degree , certification as a pharmacy technician, and a certificate of training in radiography. The Applicant ’ s post-service documentation efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post - service conduct establishes a reason to change the characterization or narrative reason. Due to the limited documentation provided by the Applicant , the NDRB determin ed clemency was not warranted.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall . 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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700232

    Original file (MD0700232.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and the evidence of post-service conduct did not mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge.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. After a thorough review of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000880

    Original file (ND1000880.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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100892

    Original file (MD1100892.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902481

    Original file (MD0902481.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to submit a written statement, orto request a hearing before an administrative discharge board.The NDRB had a copy of the Applicant’s administrative separation package as well as the Applicant’s acknowledgement of rights in response to the pending administrative separation.The Applicant provided no documentation to rebut the government’s presumption of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401684

    Original file (ND1401684.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401322

    Original file (ND1401322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends that youth and immaturity were the underlying cause for his discharge from the Navy.2. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500924

    Original file (ND1500924.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400203

    Original file (MD1400203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800977

    Original file (MD0800977.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the post service documentation and statements provided by the Applicant and did not mitigate the in service misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101865

    Original file (MD1101865.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his record of service warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge to Honorable. Based on the Applicant’s failure to meet those standards after being assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP), his command administratively processed him for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...