Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902349

Original file (MD0902349.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)       19970319 - 19970325     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19970326     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050729      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 20 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 33
MOS: 0621
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF: 19980721 -19980813 (23 days), 20001214-20010227 (74 days)
NJP:
- 19990302 :      Article (Unauthorized absence, from appointed place of duty)
         Article (Disobeyed a lawful order)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:
- 19980721 :       Art icle (Larceny ), 5 specifications
         Specification 1: Steal U.S. currency of a value of more th a n $100.00
         Specification 2: Steal compact discs and musical goods of a value more th a n $100.00
         Specification 3: Steal religious materials a value less th a n $100.00
         Specification 4: Steal correspondence course materials a value less th a n $100.00
         Specification 5: Steal religious materials a value less th a n $100.00
         Art icle (With intent to defraud falsely pretend to Bank of America)
         Sentence : 29 days
SPCM:
- 20010228 :       Art icle (Unauthorized absence, 20001006-20001213, 67 days, apprehended)
         Art icle (False official stat e me n t , with intent to deceive Criminal Investigati ve Division that he did not know the victim )
         Art icle ( Larceny) 4 specifications
         Specification 1: Steal checks of some value belonging to L Cpl [Marine name] on 10 Nov 1999
         Specification 2: Steal car parts and/or accessories of a value of about $106.22 on 25 Dec 99 property of Big O Tires
         Specification 3: Steal compact discs, tapes, videos, and/or equipment, value $340.74, property of CD Now
         Specification 4: Steal compact discs, tapes, videos, and/or equipment, value $756.71, property of CD Now
         Art icle (Forge ry on divers occasions by making and uttering 7 checks)
         Art icle (Obtaining services under false pretenses), 7 specifications
         Sentence : 6 months
CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19981021 :       For uttering checks without sufficient funds, lack of initiative toward rectifying the situation , and failure to maintain high standards as a Marine.

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 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , 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 IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Needs employment.
2. Wants U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.
3. Post-service conduct warrants consideration.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0902 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall BAD CONDUCT .
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 Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. In response to the Applicant's clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The Applicant's case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service included one 6105 counseling warning; one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violations o f the Uniform Code of Mil itary Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absent from appointed place of duty) and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation); one summary court-martial (SCM) for violations of the UCMJ: Article 121 (Larceny, 5 specifications: steal U.S. currency of a value of more than $100.00, steal compact discs and musical goods of a value more than $100.00, steal religious material of a value less than $100.00-2x, and steal correspondence course materials of a value less than $100.00 ) , and Article 134 (With intent to defraud falsely pretend to Bank of America) ; and one special court-martial (SPCM) for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absent without leave more than 30 days, 67 days, apprehended), Article 107 (False official statement , with intent to deceive Criminal Investigative Division that he did not know the victim ), Article 121 (Larceny, 4 specifications : steal checks of some value from LCPL [victim], steal car parts and accessories the property of Big O Tires value d at $106.22, steal compact discs, tapes, videos , and equipment the property of CD Now-2x: valued at $340.74 and $756.71, respectively ), Article 123 (Forgery on divers occasions by making and uttering seven checks ), and Article 134 (Obtaining services under false pretenses, 7 specifications). At the SPCM, the Applicant pled and was found guilty of the charges noted and was awarded confinement for six months, reduction in rank to E-1, and a Bad Conduct discharge.

Issue 1 : (Nondecisional) The Applicant needs an upgrade for employment. 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.

Issue 2: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants VA benefits. The 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.

Issue 3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his “discharge was fair and remotely just for the punishment brought forth” and has moved on with his life and started a family. The NDRB considers 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. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any post-service documentary evidence to form a basis of relief. The Applicant c ould have provided documentation such as, but not limited to: letters of personal reference, verifiable employment record, letters of recommendation from his employers, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, evidence of financial stability (mortgage or home rental history, credit score, credit card payments), college transcripts , documentation of community or church service, and if married, a marriage certificate. The Applicant should be aware submission of these items alone does not guarantee clemency as each discharge is reviewed by the NDRB on a case-by-case basis.

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 BAD CONDUCT 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200245

Original file (MD1200245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the Applicant’s claim of PTSD did not mitigate his misconduct.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...
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00033

Original file (MD02-00033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

(Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board's clemency relief with up-grade of his characterization of service to under honorable conditions on the basis of his post-service conduct. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970723 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301382

Original file (MD1301382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102168

Original file (ND1102168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade due to passage of time.2. The NDRB acknowledges the Applicant’s desire to provide a better life for himself and his family, however, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300338

Original file (MD1300338.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.
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00458

Original file (FD2006-00458.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AB) (HGH AMN) 1. (No appeal) (No mitigation) 26 Jul 01, RAF Lakenheath, UK - Article 121.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101287

Original file (ND1101287.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Clemency 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 that clemency was 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 of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090001693

Original file (AR20090001693.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the sentence was approved...
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01001

Original file (MD02-01001.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

(Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board's clemency relief with up-grade of his characterization of service to under honorable conditions on the basis of his post-service conduct. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 921016 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00342

Original file (FD2003-00342.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the applicant’s punitive discharge by Special Court Martial was appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case and there is insufficient basis as an act of clemency for change of discharge. Finding: Not Guilty, but Guilty of Violation of Article 130. 4 at Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, on or about 17 Specification: Did, June 1989, in the nighttime.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902349

Similar Decisions