Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801463

Original file (MD0801463.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PFC, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 2020080630

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)     20010613 - 20010716              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010717      Period of E nlistment : Years Months     Date of Discharge: 20021101
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 16 D a ys         Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 53
MOS: 0121         Highest Rank:    Fitness R eports:
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( 4 ) / 3.7 ( 4 )
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJPs :
20020911 : Art icle 112a (Wrongfully used a controlled substance.)
Awarded : Susp ended:

6105 Counseling :
20020923 : For confirmed use of illegal drugs.

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 Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe) :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Reenlistment opportunities.
2. Youth at time of misconduct.
3 . 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

: 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraph concerning s , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his problems in the Marines can be attributed to mistake s made due to his youth. 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 three NJPs for violations of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice, Article 112a (Drug use) . Violation of Article 112a is considered a serious offense, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial. The command 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. 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 . 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 ; evidence of continuing volunteer or church service, and documentation of financial stability or evidence of good standing with financial ins titutions or credit card companies . 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 Applicant provided reference letters from his employer and others in his community for the Board to consider for review. To warrant an upgrade, t he Applicant’s efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, he could have submitted more extensive documentation as discussed above, again with the understanding that submission of these documents does not guarantee an upgrade to a more favorable characterization of service. T he Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate at this time

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. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F ) , effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT .

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 112a .

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 or is referred to a court-martial fo r 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 | ND0800994

Original file (ND0800994.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 an upgrade or change would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence,...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800858

Original file (ND0800858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19981110 - 19981129Active: USMC 19970325-19970404 ELS Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19981130Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20010622Length of Service: Years Months23 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 53Highest Rank/Rate:PR3EvaluationMarks:Performance: 3.3(3) Behavior:2.3(3)OTA: 2.92Awards and Decorations (per...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801694

Original file (MD0801694.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 submitted evidence showing long-term employment and the completion of an Associates Degree. An upgrade founded upon good post-service conduct would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900466

Original file (ND0900466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than 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. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902623

Original file (ND0902623.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the military.2. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant had an opportunity to defend himself, but waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review. ” Additional Reviews...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801262

Original file (ND0801262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800777

Original file (MD0800777.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900693

Original file (ND0900693.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate based on this issue. While the Board applauds the Applicant for his stated abstinence from drugs and alcohol, steady employment, and for continuing his education, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient enough to warrant an upgrade of his discharge characterization. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801901

Original file (MD0801901.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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicant DD Form 293, no additional information was provided for review. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900283

Original file (ND0900283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801463

Similar Decisions