Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700189

Original file (MD0700189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CAPT, USMC
MD07-00189

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20071127 Characterization Received:

Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 1900.16F & SECNAVINST 1920.6B

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. One isolated incident.
                           2. Record of service.
                           3. Inequitable and prejudicial punishment.
                           4. Pos t service.

Decision

By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS .
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain MISCONDUCT.

Date: 2007 1002 DOCUMENTARY REVIEW Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation : c ivilian C ounsel

The Board found that

Issue s 1 and 2 (Equity). T he Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant violated the UCMJ. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for h is conduct or that he should not be held accountable for h is actions.

When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A n under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. C ertain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 133 , Conduct unbecoming an officer and one punitive letter of reprimand. A v iolation of UCMJ Article 133 is considered a serious offense for which dismissal is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate.

Issue 3 (Equity). 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. The Applicant implies that he was treated unfairly by his unit. 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 his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the command unfairly singled him out for discipline. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue 4 (Equity). The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge, may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that 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. The Applicant provided no documentation of post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)                       Active: 19890728 - 1 9900712 HON
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Commission : 20040525      Years Contracted : INDEF ; Extension:     Date of Discharge: 20040203
Length of Service : 09 Yrs 09 Mths 01 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level: 16       Age at Commission : 22     AFQT: NOT FOUND IN RE C ORD        MOS: 0202/3404
Highest Rank: C APT
Fitness reports : AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): RIFLE QUALIFICATION BADGE (EXPERT 3 RD AWD), PISTOL QUALIFICATION BADGE (EXPERT 4 TH AWD), NAVY AND MARINE CORPS COMMENDATION MEDAL, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL (2 ND AWD), SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (2 ND AWD), ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDAITON, NAVY UNIT COMMENDATION , LETTER OF APPRECIATION (2ND AWD)

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

20030106:        Charges preferred against Applicant. [Extracted from CG Training Command’s later of 20030317. No further information found in record.]

20030106:        Applicant signs Pre Trial Agreement. [Ext racted from CG Training Command’ s ltr of 20030317. No further information found in record.].

20030124 :        CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 133 – Conduct Unbecoming (3 specs) . Awarded – Letter of Reprimand and FOP ( $2,136.00 ) for 2 months .

20030130:        Applicant’s Appeal of NJP.

20030207:        Training and Education Command denies Appeal.

20030310 :        Punitive L etter of Reprimand issued to Applicant .

200 30317 :        CG, Training Command forwards Report of NJP and recommends that Applicant be required to show cause.

20030610:        Applicant submits voluntary waiver of BOI. In the request the Applicant noted that he had consulted with counsel. He requested a General Discharge, but indicated that he understood his waiver could result in an Other Than Honorable Discharge. He admitted committing misconduct (an adulterous relationship with Ms. M_ B_ and a violation of order s not to have contact with potential witnesses). T he Applicant stated that his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he understood the elements of the offenses. He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and of an Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service.

Officer administrative separation

Discharge Process

Report of Misconduct: CG TRAINING COMMAND 20030 321
Show Cause Recommendation:
Applicant Response: NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Endorsing Recommendation: SHOW CAUSE
Show Cause Decision: SHOW CAUSE 20030421
Applicant Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Applicant Election: NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Board of Inquiry: A PPLICANT WAIVED BOI
COMMANDANT Recommendation: 20031209
Characterization:
Separation Authority action: ASN(M&RA) 20040107
Reason for Discharge directed:
Characterization directed:
Applicant Discharged : 20040203

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:          Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:

Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6B (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 13 December 1999 until 14 December 2005 establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.

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 .

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe that 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 : 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 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his 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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600757

Original file (MD0600757.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “ Secretarial Authority. Equity – Quality of service: The Applicant contends that his characterization of discharge was unduly harsh, considering his more than 11 years of devoted service to the Marine Corps and that his “adulterous conduct was not service discrediting nor did it prejudice good order and discipline.”...
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00895

Original file (MD04-00895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Recommended administrative separation. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violating orders, assault upon a fellow officer, and conduct unbecoming an officer.
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901206

Original file (MD0901206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 10 February 2006, the day following the BOI hearing, Maj S_, the counsel for the Applicant, received the BOI record of proceedings for his initial review. The Applicant failed to show how his case was materially impacted or prejudiced by not receiving the requested additional time for a rebuttal to the BOI findings.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,...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000911

Original file (MD1000911.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900328

Original file (MD0900328.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB advises the Applicant that despite a service member’s record of service prior to or following misconduct, certain serious offenseswarrant separation from the Marine Corps in order to maintain good order and discipline—the offenses committed by the Applicant met this standard. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900784

Original file (ND0900784.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, General (Under Honorable Conditions), was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post-service documentation provided 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000114

Original file (MD1000114.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 RESIGNATION UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001600

Original file (MD1001600.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB found the Applicant’s misconduct of record to be far outside the bounds considered acceptable for a Marine officer. ” 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801072

Original file (MD0801072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The CA, per the requirements set out in paragraph 4003 of MCO P5800.16A (Marine Corps Manual for Legal Administration) forwarded the report of NJP to CMC (JAM), with the recommendation the applicant's letter of resignation be accepted and the Applicant be discharged with a “ General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization of service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902456

Original file (ND0902456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USN (ROTC) 19990823 - 20010511 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Appointment: 20010512Age: Years Contracted: Indefinite Date of Discharge: 20060228 Highest Rank: LTLength of Service: 04 Year(s) Month(s) 19 Day(s) Education Level: AFQT: NFIROfficer’s Fitness reports: AvailableAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol Periods of UA/CONF: NJP:- 20050803:Article...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700189

Similar Decisions