Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801454

Original file (MD0801454.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080625
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) 19980327 - 19980628                Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19980629      Period of Enlistment : Years Months     Date of Discharge: 20000323
Length of Service: Years Months 25 D ays        Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 73
MOS: 3531        Highest Rank:    Fitness Reports:
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):      NFIR / NFIR
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle

Periods of UA/CONF: UA: 19991008-20000204 (122 Days)
20000207-20000301 (23 Days)

CONF: 19990326-19990418 (24 Days)

NJPs:
19990728: Article 86 (Failed to go to rifle range 19990713)
Article 87 (Missed unit movement to MWTC)
Article 92 (Disobeyed lawful order)
Awarded: Suspended: FOP

20000301: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), absent without authority 19991008-20000204 (122 days)
Awarded: Suspended:

SCMs:
         19990326: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), absent without authority 19990115-19990301 (46 days)
Sentence:

6105 Counseling: 1
19990816: For being UA, following orders and regulations.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

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 Representation:              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe):

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Youth and immaturity.
2. Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20080925 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

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

Discussion

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his problems in the Marines can be attributed to mistakes made due to his youth and immaturity. 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’s service record is marred by one summary Court-Martial for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86; two NJPs for violations of Articles 86, 87, and 92; and one retention warning. These incidents all occurred within a one year time frame which clearly demonstrates the Applicant did nothing to correct his military conduct and performance during this time frame. Violations of Articles 86, 87 and 92 are considered serious offenses, punishable by a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge. While he may feel his youth was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not be held accountable for his actions due to youth or immaturity. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because of his post-service conduct. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides a discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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.

The Applicant provided unsupported statements of employment, volunteer service and family stability in his DD-293 Application. The Applicant’s efforts need to be more encompassing. Supporting documentation that could have been submitted for consideration by the Board include, but is not limited to: evidence of a verifiable long-term employment record; evidence of a drug-free existence; documentation of educational pursuits; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; and documentation of financial stability or evidence of good standing with financial institutions or credit card company’s. The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from 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 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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 January 1997 until 31 August 2001.

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 86, 87, and 92.

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 or is referred to a court-martial 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 other medical related reasons.” 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 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 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

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800121

Original file (ND0800121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Awarded –FOP and RIR; Susp - FOP 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 Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001763

Original file (ND1001763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service record Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902528

Original file (ND0902528.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201553

Original file (ND1201553.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901327

Original file (MD0901327.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB determined the awarded character of service was warranted and the narrative reason for discharge was appropriate.The Applicant provided no documentation or further evidence in support of his request to be upgrade to “Honorable. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901205

Original file (MD0901205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19970221 - 19971006Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19971007Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20010613Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)25 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:43MOS: 0811Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):/Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002191

Original file (ND1002191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to obtain G.I. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities as regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.While reviewing the Applicant’s service record, the NDRB noted that the Applicant’s EAOS was...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200278

Original file (MD1200278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB found no basis for which to grant clemency in this case. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200079

Original file (MD1200079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe the...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900768

Original file (MD0900768.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19981024 - 19990726Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990727Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20001011Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)18 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:46MOS: 9900Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801454

Similar Decisions