ex-Pvt, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20160930
Characterization of Service Received:  (per DD 214) BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  (per DD 214) COURT-MARTIAL
Reenlistment Code:  RE-4
Authority for Discharge:  (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 1105  [COURT-MARTIAL]

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
	Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED
	
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	USMCR (DEP)	20050830 - 20050830  COG	Active:	NONE

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20050831	Age at Enlistment:  17
Period of Enlistment:  4 Years  0 Months
Date of Discharge:  20090113	Highest Rank:  PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Length of Service:  03  Year(s)  04  Month(s)  14  Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  50
MOS:  3381
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):  NFIR / NFIR	Fitness Reports:  NOT APPLICABLE

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle MM GWOTSM NDSM

NJP:  1

- 20060821:	Article 86 (Absence without leave; O/A 2230 20060801 until 2125 20060817, 16 days.)
	Awarded: FOP RESTR EPD  Suspended:  NONE

SCM:  NONE

SPCM:  2

20060511:	Article 86 (Absence without leave) 2 specifications:
	Specification 1:  20051227 to 20060104, 8 days.
	Specification 2:  2130 20060106 to 1955 20060331, 84 days. 
	Sentence: FOP RIR CONF 60 days   (20060331-20060403, 4 days and 20060512-20060612, 32 days) 
	[CA approved sentence on 19 June 2006.] 

20080610:	Article 86 (Absence without leave; O/A 0730 20061212, SNM did absent herself, without authority until 0200 20080409, 484 days) 
	Sentence: CONF 90 days BCD
	[CA approved sentence except confinement per PTA on 11 July 2008.]
	
CC:  NONE

Retention Warning Counseling:  1

- 20060821:	For violation of Art 86 by absenting herself from her unit from 2230 01 August 2006 to 2125 17 August 2006.

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:	

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 contends that she was young and immature and that her PTSD and major depression were not properly considered.

Decision

Date:  20160208	     DOCUMENTARY REVIEW	Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: NONE

By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE.
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain COURT-MARTIAL.

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 U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board reviewed the Applicant's record to see if she deployed in support of a contingency operation and was, as a consequence of that deployment, diagnosed with PTSD.  A review of her record revealed that she did not deploy in support of a contingency operation, and so her case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1).  

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.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to her discharge and the discharge process to ensure her discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service included one 6105 counseling warnings, one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):  Article 86 (Absence without leave); and two special court-martial (SPCM) for violations of the UCMJ:  Article 86 (Absence without leave).  The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial on 10 June 2008.  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 and confinement for 90 days.  The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged on 11 July 2008 except the confinement per a pre-trial agreement.  The case was submitted for appellate review to the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals and the findings were affirmed and approved on 30 December 2008.  

Issue 1:  (Decisional) (Equity)  RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends that she was young and immature and that her PTSD and major depression were not properly considered.  Based on her medical record, the Applicant received a referral for a mental health evaluation on 16 November 2006, but there is no indication that she completed the evaluation.  There was no evidence of a PTSD diagnosis.  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 accordance with Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, relevant and material facts as stated in a court-martial 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 did not provide any documentary evidence of a medical diagnosis by competent medical authorities to support her claim, and her record did not contain mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded.   

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COURT-MARTIAL.   The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of her 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 Disabled 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