Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902348

Original file (MD0902348.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090820

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)       19960116 - 19960812     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19960813     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19991026      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 14 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
MOS: 0131
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF : 19990910-19991003 (24 days )

NJP:

- 19980713 :      Article (Unauthorized absence , from appointed place of duty)
         Article (Disobeyed a lawful order)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19981028 :      Article (Unauthorized absence, failed to return off leave at 19981026 remained until 19981027)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19990729 :      Article ( Assault, by striking a PFC repeatedly with his hands and feet )
         Article (Disorderly, by being in a civil disturbance)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:    SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19980209 :       For lack of leadership qualities, inability to follow the mentorship of supervisors attempting to correct deficiencies, failure to apply himself to learn his MOS to I.T.S. Standards for his rank and giving up on himself and his section when he failed to meet the performance standards required of him.

- 19990326 :       For overdue/late DPP payments, civil conviction for late video fe e s and failure to repay a personal loan to a fellow Marine . You also have been observed in inappropriate civilian attire.

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 31 January 1997 until 31 August 2001.

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 contends he was treated unfairly by his command.
2. The Applicant contends his problems resulted from his alcohol dependence.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0917 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 6105 counseling warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Mil itary Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence , 2 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation , 1 specification), Article 128 (Assault , 1 specification ), and Article 134 (Disorderly conduct, 1 specification). The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, and acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 16 Jan 1996 . Based on the o ffenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was treated unfairly by his command. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduc t of governmental affairs. No information in the record indicated any irregular or unfair treatment of the Applicant by the command. The Applicant did not provide any documentation or evidence of any kind to overcome the NDRB’s presumption of regularity. The record reflected a deliberate and persistent pattern of misconduct. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his problems in the Marine Corps result e d from his alcohol dependence. While the Applicant’s misconduct may have been related to his dependence on a lcohol , alcohol consumption is never an acceptable excuse for misconduct or poor judgment. The Applicant’s psychological evaluation stated he was responsible for his behavior. The NDRB found the Applicant’s alcohol dependence did not mitigate his misconduct of record. 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 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, Automatic Upgrades, 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

USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401788

Original file (MD1401788.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory; however, during the administrative processing, the Separating Authority decided to keep the Applicant in the Marine Corps with a suspended 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801584

Original file (MD0801584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201429

Original file (MD1201429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901154

Original file (MD0901154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Furthermore, the NDRB found documentation that the Applicant withheld pertinent information with regards to his pre-service history of anxiety and additional drug usage besides marijuana upon enlistment.In verifying the Applicant’s PTSD, the NDRB found in the Applicant’s PDHA of 27 September 2005, that there was nothing noted by the Applicant or the Health Care Provider to suggest a referral or an additional follow-up appointment was required. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901178

Original file (MD0901178.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Consider Applicant’s service in combat 4. The Board determined the characterization of service receivedwas appropriate considering the UCMJ violations involved and the lack of evidence submitted concerning this issue.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900128

Original file (ND0900128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002215

Original file (MD1002215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his narrative reason for separation should have been Convenience of the Government. The NDRB determined an upgrade to the characterization of service and a change to the narrative reason for separation would be inappropriate. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300957

Original file (MD1300957.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 15 years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801909

Original file (MD0801909.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

While PTSD may be a contributing factor for the Applicant’s alcohol dependence, the record does not reflect the Applicant was not responsible for his actions or should not be accountable for his misconduct due to PTSD or TBI.Based on: 1) the Applicant’s willful nondisclosure of his actual marijuana use and history of depression and treatment prior to enlisting, 2) his NJP for underage drinking,3) his drunk driving incidents and continuing alcohol incidents after his second treatment for...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902227

Original file (MD0902227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant believes his discharge characterization was too harsh and he was treated unfairly by his command. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s alcohol did not serve as mitigation to the numerous infractions within his record.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902348

Similar Decisions