ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:
        
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USMCR (DEP)      20020108 - 20020609     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020610     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20071018      Highest Rank:
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 15 Day(s)
Education Level:         AFQT: 46
MOS: 0331
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): /2.3        Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle (Iraq) (Iraq) PUC-N

NJP: SCM:

SPCM:

- 20040526:      Article 2 specifications
         Specification 1: 20031118-20040118, 61 days
         Specification 2: 20040126-20040402, 63 days
         Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances, Marijuana)
         Sentence: CONF 113 days (Pre-trial: 20040414-20040525, 41 days) (CONF: 20050526-20040619, 24 days) RIR-E-1
         CA: The sentence is approved and, except for the bad conduct discharge, ordered executed, but the execution of that part of the sentence extending to confinement in excess of 90 days is suspended for a period of 12 months from the date of this action, at which time, unless the suspension is sooner vacated, the suspended part of the sentence will be remitted without further action.

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20030314:      For disobeyeing a lawful order. Specifically, you were told by your section leader not to play with knives. You disobeyed this lawful order given to you by a NCO. Furthermore, you made the decision to play with a knife by grabbing for LCpl P_’s knife, which resulted in you serverely cutting your finger and being medically evacuated as the unit was preparing to cross the line of departure in Kuwait.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “RIFLE SHARPSHOOTER BADGE, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, COMBAT ACTION RIBBON, PRESIDENTIAL UNIT CITATION”
         “2007 10 18”
         “04 09 15”

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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Types of Witnesses Who Testified

         Expert:           Character:      

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 feels that his misconduct was minor and an isolated incident for which his in-service performance warrants an upgrade to General.
2.       The Applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded because he was struggling with undiagnosed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and emotional stress as a result of a combat deployment to Iraq.

Decision


Date: 20150901           Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD, in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist. In accordance with section 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution. The Applicant stated that his PTSD is related to his combat service in Iraq. The Applicant’s service record documents completion of a deployment Iraq from March to October 2003, in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM.

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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warning and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave terminated by apprehension, 61 days and 63 days) and Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances). The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 25 May 2004. A qualified legal defense counsel represented the Applicant throughout the trial by Special Court-Martial process. Given the facts of the case, the Special Court-Martial awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge, forfeiture of $795 pay per month for four months, confinement for a period of 113 days, and reduction to Private, pay grade E-1. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but suspended all confinement in excess of 90 days for a period of 12 months. The Applicant was credited 49 days confinement against the sentence to confinement. The case was submitted for review to the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals without assignments of error; it was reviewed and the findings were affirmed on 14 November 2006.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant feels that his misconduct was minor and an isolated incident for which his in-service performance warrants an upgrade to General. The NDRB found the evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded because he was struggling with undiagnosed PTSD and emotional stress as a result of a combat deployment to Iraq. The NDRB requested all records of medical treatment, both active duty and post-service, from the VA. The records received from the VA failed to document any request for evaluation, any diagnosis, or any findings of PTSD or other mental health concerns. Moreover, the Applicant did not provide any evidence of a diagnosis of PTSD from any other private mental health treatment provider to document his claim. The NDRB found no evidence in the record of any indications of, or diagnosis for, PTSD. Additionally, there is no evidence in either the Applicant’s service record, or the documentation he provided, that demonstrated any problems or symptoms manifesting during his enlistment from his service in Iraq. Furthermore, the Applicant’s record does not document any attempts to seek help for any combat stress-related symptoms while in service. Lacking any evidence of PTSD, the NDRB is unable to establish this contention as a basis for mitigation or consideration as an extenuating circumstance. 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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 , or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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