Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301187
Original file (MD1301187.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMCR
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130508
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:         NONE              Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050924     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20081218      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service :
Inactive: Y ea rs M on ths 17 D a ys
Active: Y ea rs M on ths 12 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 74
MOS: 3533
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20070914 :       Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ; on 25 June 2007, at the motor pool during Exercise Talisman Sabre, did willfully and knowingly disobey a lawful order of a noncommissioned officer by refusing to perform physical training )
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:    SPCM:   CC:     Retention Warning Counseling :

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. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6207, HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT .

B. 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 seeks an upgrade to Honorable, a change in narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, a change in his separation code to JFF, and a change in his Reenlistment (RE) code to RE-1A based on the repeal of the “Don’t A sk, Don’t T ell” policy.
2.       The Applicant contends a less than Honorable characterization is not warranted based on one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of Uniform Code of Military Justice ( UCMJ ) Article 91.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 40 109            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
By a vote of 5-0 the Separation Code shall change to JFF.
By a vote of 5-0 the Reentry Code shall remain RE-4.

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 g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer). Based on the Applicant’s homosexual admission and results from a subsequent preliminary investigation, his command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant seeks an upgrade to Honorable, a change in narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, a change in his separation code to JFF, and a change in his Reenlistment (RE) code to RE-1A based on the repeal of the “Don’t A sk, Don’t T ell” policy. In accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16F), Paragraph 6207, which was in effect at the time of the Applicant’s discharge, the Applicant’s in-service statements to his chain-of-command, coupled with the command ’ s preliminary investigation, created a rebuttable presumption that he had the propensity to engage in homosexual acts. The Applicant chose not to challenge or to rebut this presumption. Based on the stat ement made by the Applicant, his decision not to rebut any presumptions thereafter, and the commanding officer’s belief that the Applicant’s statements were credible, the Applicant was processed administratively for involuntary separation and was assigned a corresponding reentry code of RE-4. At the time of discharge, processing for separation was mandatory i n accordance with MCO P1900.16F and Department of Defense Policy under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. Given the detailed documents of record, the Applicant’s personal statement, and the commanding officer’s statement in the administrative separation endorsement, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s separation for Homosexual Admission was proper and equitable at the time it was issued.

Characterization of Service: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to re-characterize the discharge to Honorable if the original discharge was based solely on DADT, and there were no aggravating factors in the record, such as misconduct. Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. An Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for Naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the

member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The Applicant’s service record reflected one NJP for violation of UCMJ Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer) for willfully and knowingly disobey ing a lawful order of a noncommissioned officer by refusing to perform physical training . B ased on the evidence of record, the NDRB determined the aggravating factor of misconduct existed and the quality of the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful , h owever, significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of dut y outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record . As such, and in accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the DADT law, it is appropriate to characterize the service as General (Under Honorable Conditions). Relief denied.

Narrative Reason for Separation: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission w as the only basis for discharge. This memorandum further directs that the narrative reason for separation should normally change to Secretarial Authority with a corresponding Separation Code designator (SPD code). The record of service reflects that, at the time of discharge, the Applicant was notified of only one reason for disch arge - Homosexual Admission. Given the documented misconduct, the Applicant should have also been notified for separation due to Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense), however, the command chose to notify the Applicant for discharge solely based on Homosexu al Admission . Accordingly, the NDRB determined that the narrative reason for separation will change to Secretarial Authority; additionally, the DD Form 214 shall be amended to reflect a corrected authority for discharge (MARCORSEPMAN paragraph 6214) and the corresponding SPD code of JFF . Relief granted.

Reentry Code: In accordance with the Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) Memorandum (Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell), dated 20 September 2011, service review boards should normally grant requests to change the reentry code to an immediately-eligible-to-reenter category if the discharge and corresponding reentry code was: (1) based solely on DADT or a similar policy in place prior to enactment of DADT and (2) there were no aggravating factors in the record, such as misconduct. As authorized by the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs), the NDRB may change reentry codes as set forth in the USD (P&R) memorandum dated 20 September 2011. The Applicant received an RE-4 reentry code due to early termination of his service for Homosexual Admission. However, the Applicant’s service record documents an NJP for violation of UCMJ Article 91. As such, in accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s reentry code shall remain RE-4. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends a less than Honorable characterization is not warranted based on one NJP for violation of UCMJ Article 91. The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. The characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was warrante d. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and the administrative separation process, the NDRB found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. However, pursuant to Public Law 111-321, and in accordance with the guidance set forth in the Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) Memorandum (Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell), dated 20 Sep 2011, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS), but the narrative reason for separation shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY with a corresponding SPD code of JFF. The assigned reentry code shall remain RE-4. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500040

    Original file (ND1500040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400941

    Original file (ND1400941.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends her narrative reason and associated separations code for discharge should be changed from “Homosexual Conduct” to “Secretarial Authority” due to the repeal of the “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy.2. In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300439

    Original file (ND1300439.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Narrative Reason for Separation: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. The Applicant’s service record documents no misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200613

    Original file (ND1200613.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Given the documents of record, the Applicant’s personal statement, and the commanding officer’s statement in the separation endorsement, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s separation by reason of Homosexual Admission, in accordance with the MILPERSMAN, was proper at the time it was issued.Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200655

    Original file (ND1200655.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Given the record, the Applicant’s personal statement, and the commanding officer’s statement in the separation endorsement, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s separation by reason of Homosexual Admission, in accordance with Article 1910-148 of the MILPERSMAN, was proper at the time it was issued.Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301056

    Original file (ND1301056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Conduct was the only basis for discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301077

    Original file (ND1301077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, as a result of the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the characterization of the discharge to Honorable where Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. Therefore, the NDRB voted to upgrade the Applicant’s characterization to Honorable.Narrative Reason for Separation: In accordance with the 20 September...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200272

    Original file (ND1200272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Narrative Reason for Separation: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, ” service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. Accordingly, the NDRB determined that the relief, as requested, is warranted; therefore, the Applicant’s reentry code shall change to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201309

    Original file (MD1201309.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the Board’s review of the Applicant’s record of service and discharge process, the NDRB identified an inequity in the Applicant’s characterization of service and determined that the Applicant warrants a change to the narrative reason for separation and corresponding reentry code in accordance with repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.The Applicant received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service at discharge.Characterization of service at discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201118

    Original file (ND1201118.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...