Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901829

Original file (MD0901829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090616

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)       20080311 - 20080413     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080414     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20081031      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 18 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 48
MOS: 9971
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20080814 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation on or about 20080808 by taking half of required equipment from pack to lighten load in order to complete 10k hike )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20080822 :      Article 83 (Fraudulent enlistment, appointment, or separation by concealing mental health issues to include bi-polar, ADHD, and depression, also had knowledge of a threat to a middle school)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer by refusing to train)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:
- 20080822 :      For violation of article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ) and 83 ( Fraudulent enlistment, appointment, or separation ) resulted in a NJP held this date.

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 P1900.16E), 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 .

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 83 (Fraudulent enlistment ) and Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or pe tty officer ) .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant seeks to reenlist into the Navy.
2. The Applicant seeks an upgrade for educational benefits.
3. The Applicant feels his discharge was improper.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0422 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 stan dards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 83 (Fraudulent enlistment by concealing mental health issues, such as: being bi-pol ar, ADD/ADHD, depression and additional behavioral issues whi le growing up), Article 91 (I nsubordinate conduct by willfully dis obeying a lawful order by refusing to train) and Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation by wrongfully removing half of his required gear from his backpack to lighten his load during a 10 kilometer hike. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to s ubmit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority and to request an administrative board . Although, on his DD Form 293, he mentioned that he did in fact talk with legal counsel about his fraudulent enlistment charge and the circumstances pertaining to his situation.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to reenlist into the Navy. 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for educational benefits. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was improper on the grounds that he was charged with fraudulent enlistment during his third week of MCT, which was about four months into his enlistment . The NDRB tried unsuccessfully to retrieve the Applicant’s medical record in order to g et insight into his situation and obtain a clearer picture of the timeline the command used during the separation process . The Applicant was notified at the 180 day mark of active service , which the NDRB opined to be within a reasonable execution timeline. Although the Applicant may feel that his fraudulent enlistment should have been the main reason he was disch arged , the fact that he willfully refused to train coupled with his ongoing lack of integrity ultimately determined that he would received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service vice an entry level uncharacterized discharge . The NDRB determined that the command acted properly and that the discharge, as given, was warranted. 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 Additional Reviews , Reenlistment/RE-code , Employment/Educational Opportunities 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 Disable d American 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 their 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

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700553

Original file (ND0700553.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Characterization of Service and reenlistment code is not justifiable as the recruiter told the Applicant not disclose a suspended driver’s license at the time of enlistment. Discharge Process Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge:- EVIDENCED BY SUSPENDED DRIVER’S LICENSE AND MULTIPLE UNPAID TRAFFIC TICKETS Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:NOT FOUND IN RECORD Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101720

Original file (ND1101720.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700629

Original file (MD0700629.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Date:20071120Location:Washington D.C.Representation: Discussion Issue1: 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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of ServicePrior Service:...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400145

Original file (MD1400145.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: or uncharacterizedNarrative Reason change to:ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20080702 - 20080810Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080811Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20090309Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)29 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:64MOS: 8011Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):N/A/N/AFitness...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700850

Original file (MD0700850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20040729 - 20041227 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20041228 Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20051003Length of Service: 00 Yrs 09 Mths03 Dys Lost Time: Days UA: Days...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901426

Original file (MD0901426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900470

Original file (ND0900470.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200356

Original file (MD1200356.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 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101588

Original file (MD1101588.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined relief based on this issue was not warranted. The Applicant could have provided 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 conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200524

Original file (ND1200524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901829

Similar Decisions