Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301456
Original file (MD1301456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130724
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)       20000118 - 20000123     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20000124     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20030618      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
MOS: 3381
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / 2.1 ( )         Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

NJP:     SCM:              CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

SPCM:

- 20010509 :       Art icle (Absence without leave)
         Specification 1: UA from 20000930 - 20010104
         Specification 2: Did, on 20010108, at 0630, fail to go to appointed place of duty .
         Specification 3: Did, on 20010122, at 0630, fail to go to appointed place of duty.
         Sentence : CONF 75 days (20010301-20010508 , 70 days)

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 seeks a change in her RE-code to reenlist into the Armed Forces .
2.       The Applicant contends her disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by unaddressed sexual harassment .
3.       The Applicant contends she was innocent of larceny and only pled guilty because of the advice of her counsel .

Decision

 Date: 20 1 4 02 12            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 Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental 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 record of service included one S pecial C ourt- M artial for violations of UCMJ Article 8 6 ( Absence without leave, 3 specifications ). Based on the Applicant ’ s 08 May 2001 Pre-Trial Agreement , she was convicted and sentence d at a S pecial C ourt- M artial, resulting in a reduction in rank to E-1, confinement limited to time already served in pre-trial confinement, payment of restitution to the economic victim of her misconduct, and separation with a Bad Conduct Discharge. The Applicant fully exercised her post - trial rights to request clemency and appeal her discharge characterization. All appeals and requests were denied.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in her RE-code to reenlist into the Armed Forces . 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by unaddressed sexual harassment at her command. A detailed review of the Applicant’s record of service and record of trial fail to demonstrate any basis for this accusation. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support her issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that she was sexually harassed while at her command and that this sexual harassment contributed to or mitigated her misconduct. Statements alone, without sufficient documentary evidence, are not enough for the NDRB to form a basis of relief. Clemency denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she was innocent of the charge of larceny and only pled guilty because of the advice of her counsel. The Applicant’s record of trial indicates she was only found guilty of three specifications of UCMJ Article 86 (Absence without leave) in accordance with her 08 May 2001 pre-trial agreement . The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support her issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that she was coerced by her defense counsel to falsely plead guilty to the any of the charges against her. The record of trial demonstrates that she not only accepted and was satisfied with her counsel but also that her counsel went to significant effort to call in expert testimony to raise the possibility that she may have falsely confessed to the allegations of misconduct against her. R elevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts . 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 for additional information.

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 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401671

    Original file (MD1401671.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When the Applicant submitted her request for separation in lieu of trial (SILT), she submitted a letter along with the request which became part of the official record. 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain IN LIEU...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401546

    Original file (ND1401546.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200470

    Original file (MD1200470.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201065

    Original file (MD1201065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although she was administratively processed for separation with the possibility of receiving an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service, her commanding officer recommended she receive a General discharge. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801056

    Original file (ND0801056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The second incident occurred in the hotel where the drilling reservists stay during drill periods. The Board determined 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800830

    Original file (MD0800830.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the issues invoked in the Applicant’s clemency request had been properly considered by the SPCM which heard her case and reviewed by the Navy-Marine Corps Appellate Review Activity; clemency founded upon the issues presented would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301779

    Original file (ND1301779.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants an upgrade for employment as a peace officer.2. 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 :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601032

    Original file (ND0601032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge [REQUESTED BY MEMBER] Discharge Process: Voluntary: Requested by MemberDate Member Requested Separation:20051024Member Requested Separation Due To: BY COURT MARTIALCharacterization Requested:UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDIONSmember Recognized Least Favorable:Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): NONEDischarge directed by (date): COMMANDING OFFICER, TRANSIENT PERSONNEL UNIT, NORFOLK, 20041024Narrative reason directed: BY COURT MARTIALCharacterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001127

    Original file (ND1001127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends she was denied her right to counsel. The Applicant contends PTSD diagnosed in service mitigates her misconduct of record. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401672

    Original file (MD1401672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, and after a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review, the Applicant was punitively discharged from the service with a Bad Conduct Discharge. 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 BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall...