Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901508

Original file (MD0901508.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090506

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN [CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY]

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20050226 - 20050724     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050725     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060717      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 03 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 41
MOS: 9971
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA : 20060115 – 20060206 (23 days)

NJP:

SCM:
- 20060331 :      Article 81 (Violation of general order)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order)
         Article 107 (False official statement)
         Sentence: ( 20060302 – 20060328, 27 days)
         CA Action: Accused credited 27 days confinement against the sentence to confinement.
         [Judge Advocate Review determined that the SCM Officer did not have jurisdiction over the accused because the S ecretary of the Navy did not specifically grant permission for an Army First lieutenant to serve in that capacity .]

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:
- 20051128 :       Concerning physical condition that interferes with duties.

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. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 and Present, paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT .

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. The Applicant believes his discharge characterization was based on his misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20 10 012 8 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 . T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 61 05 counseling warning , an non- adjudicated offense of unauthorized absence (23 days) and a Summary Court-Martial (SCM) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 81 (Conspired with other Marines to commit an offense), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation: SECNAVINST 1610.2A, by wrongful ly participating in the beating/hazing of numerous Marines) and Article 107 (False official statement to an officer about the hazing incident). The SCM finding was set aside following a review which determined that the SCM Officer, an Army F irst L ieutenant , was not granted permission by the Secretary of the Navy to serve in that capacity . T he Applicant was processed for separation due to “ Condition Not A Disability ” at the recommendation of medical authorities due to a medical issue (congenital rib and sternum deformity with a tension wire), which existed prior to entry (EPTE) . When process ed for a dministrative s eparation, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority. The Applicant was not entitled to an a dministrative discharge b oard.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge characterization was solely based on his SCM —which was overturned . After reviewing the Applicant’s service record, the NDRB found that the Applicant was properly discharge due to “Condition Not a Disability.” The NDRB also noted within his record of service a n unauthorized absence status for 23 days (15 January 2006 to 6 February 2006). This violation of the UCMJ was not adjudicated, but the NDRB determined that this offense, coupled with documented misconduct, and poor proficiency and conducts marks contribute d to the rational the command used to characterize his brief service in the Marine Corps as “General” vice “Honorable.” 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 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 Addition al Reviews, and Post-Service Conduct .

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 | 2013_Marine | MD1300631

Original file (MD1300631.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant, however, was not taken to a Special Court-Martial but was administratively separated after requesting separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT). The Applicant could have provided additional documentation as detailed 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 by case basis to determine if post-service...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300662

Original file (MD1300662.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100298

Original file (MD1100298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. After considering the record, and the evidence provided by the Applicant, the NDRB determined an upgrade to General (Under Honorable Conditions) is warranted. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500434

Original file (MD1500434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) . ” Additional Reviews : After a...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500606

Original file (MD1500606.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 | 2010_Marine | MD1000561

Original file (MD1000561.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20021212 - 20030406Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20031225Age at Enlistment: 20Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20050401Highest Rank:Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s)7 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:31MOS: 0341/8911Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):2.1()/1.4()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300404

Original file (MD1300404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. However, the Applicant in no way warranted the hazing he received while on active duty, but the NDRB determined he was given mitigation for his misconduct by the Separation Authority when he determined to discharge the Applicant with a General characterization of service. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200529

Original file (MD1200529.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...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401441

Original file (MD1401441.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 MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002227

Original file (MD1002227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

` DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901508

Similar Decisions