Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000237

Original file (MD1000237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091021

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)       19980220 - 19980406     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19980407     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20010822      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 21 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 33
MOS: 0313
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle MM

Periods of CONF : 20010320 – 20010413 (25)

NJP:

- 2000 1206 :      Article (Wrongful use of controlled substance) : Marijuana (Concentration NFIR)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 200012 28 :      Article (Unauthorized Absence): From 1800 on 20001206 to 2145 on 20012006
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward a Noncommissioned Officer or Petty Officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) : Consumed alcohol while on restriction
         Article 112 ( Drunk on duty)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

- 20000320 :      Article (Charge 1)
         Specification 1: SNM did on or about 2200/20010120 break the limits of his restriction.
         Specification 2: SNM did on or about 20010121 break the limits of his restriction.
         Specification 3: SNM did on or about 20010125 break the limits of his restriction.
         Specification 4: SNM did on or about 20010127 break the limits of his restriction.
         Article (Charge 2)
         Specification 1: SNM , on or about 0700/20010126 w rongfully solicit ed Pvt Parlor to mak e a false official statement .
         Specification 1: SNM , on or about 0700/20010126 w rongfully solicit ed PFC McMahan to make a false official statement .
         Sentence:

SPCM:             CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 19991217 :       For failure to follow a lawful order to connect the feed shoot to the main gun of an LAV-25.

- 20001129:      For illegal drug involvement; THC.

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:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation:          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:          From/To Representation:          From/To Congress member:

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. Discharge is affecting employment opportunities.
2. Post-service conduct warrants consideration.

Decision
Date: 20 1 0 0 902 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 Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( UA , 1 specification) , Article ( Insubordinate Conduct toward a Noncommissioned Officer , ), Article (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation, ), Article 112 (Drunk on Duty, ), and Article ( Wrongful use of a Controlled Substance , ) . It also included for of the UCMJ: Article ( General Article: Breaking Restriction , 4 specifications ) and Article (General Article: Soliciting a False Official Statement, 2 specifications). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 18 February 1998 . Based on the Article 112a violation , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The applicant provided a statement indicating his pursuit of a career in law enforcement. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Issue 2 : (Decisional) ( ) . The applicant provided a statement indicating that he has not been in any major trouble with civil authorities since being discharged , therefore contending that his post-service conduct warrants consideration. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that 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. Unfortunately, the statement the Applicant submitted along with the DD Form 293 is insufficient documentation to evaluate his post-service character and conduct. F or example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of the following: 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; evidence of a drug-free lifestyle; and attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts). C ompletion 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. 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, 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100023

Original file (MD1100023.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1001406

Original file (MD1001406.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 . ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301458

Original file (MD1301458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20080710 - 20081019Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20081020Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20111102Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)14 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:57MOS: 6323Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100633

Original file (MD1100633.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, the Board determined this issue did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted. Full relief to Honorable was not granted due to the Applicant’s repetitive and serious misconduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and record entries, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.The Applicant...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400742

Original file (MD1400742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the Applicant did not submit any documentation, nor is there anything in his records, to warrant clemency. ” 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201808

Original file (MD1201808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Over the next 14 months, he received another retention warning and was found guilty of additional charges at a second Summary Court-Martial before being found guilty at a Special Court-Martial for violating UCMJ Article 112a for using marijuana. After a review of the records, the NDRB found no basis for clemency. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301278

Original file (MD1301278.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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500093

Original file (MD1500093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Given the facts of the case, the Special Court-Martial awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge, and confinement for a period of five months. 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 BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COURT-MARTIAL. ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201391

Original file (ND1201391.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In his current enlistment, the Applicant met the requirements for administrative separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense) and Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct). A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant had a pattern of misconduct in his current enlistment, that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400203

Original file (MD1400203.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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000237

Similar Decisions