Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800138

Original file (MD0800138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-LCPL, USMCR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20071030

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)     20020621 - 2002 1014              Active:          20021015 – 20030425      HON
Period of Service Under Review:                                              20040628 – 20050627      HON
Date of Enlistment: 20060321               Period of enlistment : Years Months             Date of Discharge: 20070629
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 03 Mths 09 D ys         Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 88
MOS: 1371 Highest Rank: CPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      4.4(14 / 4.3(14)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): PH, CAR, ICM, GWOTSM, SSDR x 2, NDSM, HSM, SMCRM, AFRM x 2, Rifle EX

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJPs :     3
         20070109 : Art 86                           Awarded – FOP, RESTR, EPD                 Susp -
         20070214 : Art(s) 86 x 2, 92, 107, 134    Awarded – RIR, FOP, RESTR, EPD   Susp - FOP
         20070501 : Art 92                           Awarded – FOP, RESTR, EPD                 Susp - FOP

6105 Counseling :
         20070309 : For insubordinate conduct towards an NCO .

Types of Documents Submitted

Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or Medical Record:          Other Records:

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

Additional Statements From Applicant:             From Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)
         -Divorce decree 20061121

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. Treated unfairly by command.
2. Should have received a medical discharge for PTSD.

Decision

Date: 20 08 0214 Location: Washington D.C R epresentation :

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

Discussion

Issue 1 (Equity). The Applicant implies that he was treated unfairly by h is 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the command unfairly singled h im out for unfair and/or unjust discipline. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue 2 : ( ). The Applicant contends that his disciplinary issues that led to his separation were caused by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) upon returning from duty in Iraq. While the Applicant claims that a medical discharge should have been awarded, his clear pattern of misconduct was the supported basis. When reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. The NDRB generally does not consider the circumstances surrounding an Applicant’s stated condition, the implied incorrect diagnosis, nor the medical treatment given to the Applicant to be of sufficient nature to exculpate the Applicant’s narrative reason for discharge. 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. . 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 one discharge warning and three n on - judicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article (s) 86, 92 , 107, and 134 . Violation of UCMJ Article (s) 92 and 107 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. 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. The medical evidence of record does not suggest that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or should not be held accountable for his actions. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 01 Sep 2001 until Present.

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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article (s) 92, 107, 134.

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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.

Employmen t / 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0800376

Original file (MD0800376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. ” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801152

Original file (MD0801152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

There was no evidence in the record, nor was any submitted by the Applicant, documenting he was not responsible for his actions or that the misconduct should be excused based on youth and immaturity. Again, 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800378

Original file (MD0800378.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. ” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801068

Original file (MD0801068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTIONS TO THE APPLICANT’S DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800832

Original file (MD0800832.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801241

Original file (MD0801241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800085

Original file (MD0800085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL , of...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701170

Original file (MD0701170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801154

Original file (MD0801154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service awarded by the Special Court-Martial was an appropriate...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800800

Original file (MD0800800.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

6105 Counseling: 20050718: For Misconduct, Reckless Driving 20060304: Violations of Article 92, Failure to Obey a Lawful Order; Art 113, Misbehavior of a Sentinel 20060414: Violations of Articles 91, Insubordinate Conduct; Art 107, False Official Statement Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800138

Similar Decisions