Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900270

Original file (MD0900270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20081114

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)     19970820 - 19980628     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19980629     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20028114      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 16 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
MOS: 0612
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 19990429 :      Article 86 (UA ) 0700-0830, 19990424
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20000808 :      Article 86 (UA ) 0530-0610, 20000802
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20000919 :      Article 86 (UA ) 0615-0710, 20000918
         Awarded: Suspended: for 41 days

SCM:
- 20020424 :      Article 86 ( UA )
         Sentence: (2002042 6 -20020517 (2 2 days))
         CA Action (20020425) Approved and ordered executed.

SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 19990210 :       For your alcohol related incident, specifically, the involvement with civilian authorities while on liberty status. On 19990206, approximately 2200, SNM was taken into custody by civilian authority, for under age drinking and carrying an open container.

- 20000918 :      For violation of Article 90, failure to obey a superior commissioned officer and violation of article 111, reckless operation of a motor vehicle. Specifically, you were ordered by your Company Commander and

Retention Warning Counseling: (cont)

         First Sergeant to report any involvement with civilian authorities to the Squadron Duty Officer (SDO) as soon as possible. You received three citations within a five-day period for the traffic violation of
         speeding, one citation for traveling in excess of 110 miles per hour, in which you compromised the safety of two other Marines in the Data Platoon. The second violation was for driving 92 miles per hour in a 70 mile per hour zone. The third violation was for doing 84 miles per hour in a 55 mile per hour zone, and you did not make an attempt to notify anyone, to include the SDO.

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:          Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:
Additional Statements :
From Applicant:         From Representat ion : From Congress member :

Other Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , 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 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. Education benefits.
2. Post-service conduct .

Decision

Date: 2009 0305 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 , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because of his post-service conduct. 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 record of service was marred by two retention warnings, three NJPs and on e SCM for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (UA) . The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides 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. 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 help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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; 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

The Applicant provided only a statement he has joined the Army National Guard. While the Board applauds the Applicant’s post service efforts, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient enough to warrant an upgrade. To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

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 | 2013_Navy | ND1300178

Original file (ND1300178.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20000218 - 20000515Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20000516Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20001006Highest Rank/Rate:ARLength of Service:Years Months21 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 54EvaluationMarks:Performance:N/ABehavior:N/AOTA: N/AAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of CONF:...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500352

Original file (MD1500352.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer), Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 2 specifications), and Article (General article, Drunk and disorderly in his conduct towards a SSgt (SDO) and Sgt (DNCO); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801399

Original file (ND0801399.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19981218 - 19981227Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment:19981228Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040506Length of Service: Years Months15 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 41Highest Rank/Rate:SNEvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIR Behavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of UA:...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900191

Original file (MD0900191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant did not know he was UA for 30 years, believed he was discharged. The NDRB 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900829

Original file (ND0900829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, relief is denied.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Former ser Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, theBoard found 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002295

Original file (ND1002295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his discharge. ” Additional...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900365

Original file (ND0900365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service, grade or record of service. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101858

Original file (ND1101858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

of a controlled substance, marijuana, 20021211) Awarded: RIR (to E-1) FOP Suspended: SCM:NONE SPCM:NONECC:NONERetention Warning Counseling:NONE 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900500

Original file (ND0900500.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.The Applicant provided no documentation in support of her request. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00373

Original file (MD02-00373.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered: Letter from applicantCopy of DD Form 214 Applicant's DD Form 214 worksheetDept of Otolaryngology ltr dtd 9 Feb 99Referral for Civilian Medical Care dtd 9 Feb 99Naval Medical Center Portsmouth Telephone Consultation dtd 19 Aug 99Travel Authorization Service Record pages (41 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900270

Similar Decisions