Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000260

Original file (MD1000260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091027

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)       19990727 - 19991004     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19991005     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050210      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 18 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 59
MOS: 8152
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA/CONF: 20010914-20011012 (28 days), 20011204-20021119 (350 days) / 20021120-20021230 (40 days)

NJP:
- 20010406 :       Article 113 ( Misbehavior of senti nel or lookout - s leeping on post)
         Awarded : Susp ended:
SCM:
- 20011116 :       Art icle (U nauthorized absence for 28 days)
         Sentence :

SPCM:
- 20021230 :       Art icle (Unauthorized absence for 350 days )
         Sentence : CONF 90 days

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ (28) 20010914-20011012; (350) 20011204-20021119; (40) 20021120-20021230 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

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 .

C . 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 his discha rge is inequitable , because of the circumstances that led to his unauthorized absences.
2 . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 20110106 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 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 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 113 (Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout - sleeping on post) ; Summary Court-Martial (SCM) for violation of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence for 28 days) ; and Special Court-Martial (SPCM) for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 350 days). The Applicant was convicted at a SPCM and was separated from the Marine Corps with a Bad Conduct discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because of the circumstances pertaining to his unauthorized absences. The Applicant states he was singled out, hazed , and bullied, which led him to leave his unit. T he NDRB found no comments or annotations in his record that any of these events happened , besides his statement he provided to the NDRB on his DD 293 Form . T he Applicant wrote statement s after his first UA stating , “I was tired of the whole lifestyle , sir, everything about the military I didn’t like anymore. The fact that I can’t live my life, I can’t be me, I can’t do anything I want to do because the military direct s how I live … The whole lifestyle is a burden to me, I want to be me, do what I want, do what I like, how I think is how I am . ” and “I’m still wasting my time in the Marine Corps. It’s not what looks good on an application, it’s about me and I want out of the Marine Corps.” Additionally, at the Applicant’s Special Court-Martial, he offered no explanation for why he went UA nor mentioned any bullying to the military judge. It should also be noted that the Applicant went UA three day s after the terror attack s on 9/11 /01 at a time when his Nation needed him most . T he NDRB determined his issue is not substantiated by any documentation and is without merit. Clemency denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. In conjunction with several character references, the Applicant states he has been attending college, is gainfully employed, has a wife and two kids , and has stayed out of trouble for the last seven years. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined the discharge was appropriate and the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct that precipitated the discharge. To warrant clemency, the Applicant’s post - service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced evidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the addendum with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee clemency. The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to this country. Clemency denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, discharge process , and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COURT-MARTIAL. 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 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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400222

Original file (MD1400222.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900305

Original file (ND0900305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Should the Applicant feel at some later time his post-service conduct is worthy of personally presenting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, etc., willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.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 ADDENDUM: Information for...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300417

Original file (MD1300417.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.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900709

Original file (ND0900709.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

This admission, in conjunction with the fraudulent entry into the country, placed the U. S. Navy in a negative light.Per Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) 1910-148, characterization of service is based on a member’s record of service in cases of homosexual conduct with no evidence (including admissions) or aggravating circumstances.For the edification of the Applicant, when the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200292

Original file (ND1200292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20021104 - 20021119Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20021120Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040712Highest Rank/Rate:SNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 23 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 67EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(1)Behavior:2.0(1)OTA: 2.67Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle Pistol...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800515

Original file (ND0800515.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 ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401644

Original file (ND1401644.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 (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902055

Original file (ND0902055.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901906

Original file (MD0901906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the Pro/Con marks and based on the limited post service documentation provided. 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 previous...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001425

Original file (MD1001425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000260

Similar Decisions