Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901155

Original file (MD0901155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090326

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)       20011101 - 20020210     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020211     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060309      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
MOS: 0811
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2) GWOTSM CoC

Periods of UA / CONF : 20040503-200 4 0505 (3 days) / 20050929-20051022 (24 days - reason NFIR: NDRB assumes CONF)

NJP:
- 20040517 :      Article 92 (Violated leave and liberty regulations)
         Article 86 (Failure to report to appointed place of duty)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20050713 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 86 (U nauthorized absence )
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM: SPCM: NFIR CC: NFIR

Retention Warning Counseling :

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 :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Applicant served a full enlistment and doesn’t know why he received a General discharge.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 1029 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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 g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Failure to report to appointed place of duty, 1.5 hours ) and Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation: violated leave and liberty policy and was briefed not to drive while intoxicated —he was apprehended by the Jacksonville Police Department with a blood alcohol content of .12 ) . The Applicant was allowed to complete his obligation to th e Marine Corps and was then discharged.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he served his full enlistment and doesn’t know why he got the discharge he received (General) . The Applicant’s last year of service was marred with incidents of misconduct—he rec eived two NJPs and was also apprehended by civilian authorities for driving while intoxicated. T he NDRB opined that the Applicant could have been involuntarily separated with a more unfavorable characterization of service than that received. For the Applicant’s edification , when a Marine reaches his end of active service, the characterization of service is based on his average proficiency and conduct (Pro/Con) markings durin g an enlistment. The s tandards of performance and condu ct a re determined per MCO P1900.16F (Separation and Retirement Manual) , MCO P1610.7 (Performance Evaluation System), MCO P1070.12 ( Individual Records Administration Manual ) and customs of the service. To attain an Honorable discharge, m inimum acceptable Pro/Con markings attained durin g an enlistment are 3.0 and 4.0 , respectively. Failure of a Marine to achieve either of these standards is evidence of significant negative aspects that outweigh all but the most meritorious military records. Marines who do not achieve these standards should not receive an honorable discharge. The NDRB determined th at a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service was warranted primarily due to the Applicant’s own m isconduct , which caused his Pro/Con m arks ( 3.6/3.5 respectively ) to suffer and be below min imums for an Honorable characterization of service .

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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additi onal Reviews, and Post-Service Conduct .

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present,
Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION .

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 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (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; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); 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 in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 | 2010_Marine | MD1002020

Original file (MD1002020.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Based on the Applicant’s proficiency and conduct (Pro/Con) marks of 3.8/3.5, command discharged him with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service when he completed his required active service. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901733

Original file (MD0901733.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements:From Applicant:From Representation:From Congress member:Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002045

Original file (MD1002045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Therefore, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002076

Original file (MD1002076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901502

Original file (MD0901502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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. ...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901906

Original file (MD0901906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the Pro/Con marks and based on the limited post service documentation provided. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002042

Original file (MD1002042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Applicant’s proficiency and conduct (Pro/Con) marks of 4.1/3.9, command separated her with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service following completion of her required active service. The Applicant could have provided documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902343

Original file (MD0902343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant had agreed to take his punishment and still receive an Honorable discharge.The Applicant provided no documented evidence to support his issue. The NDRB recalculated the Applicant’s Pro/Con marks and found his overall average Pro/Con marks during his enlistment to be 4.3/4.0, which met the minimum requirement to receive an Honorable characterization of service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001500

Original file (MD1001500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief granted.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 . ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901369

Original file (MD0901369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants to attend college. Marines who do not achieve these standards should not receive an Honorable discharge.The Applicant’s Pro/Con marks were 3.9/3.5, which do not the minimum acceptable standards.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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901155

Similar Decisions