Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000322

Original file (MD1000322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091026

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)       20030825 - 20040815     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040816     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20080924      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 09 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
MOS: 0331
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2) MCGCM (2) ACM (2) MM LoA

Period s of CONF : 20080430-2008052 3 , 24 days; 20080715-2008080 7 , 2 4 days

NJP:

- 20071030 :       Article 9 1 (Disrespectful towards an NCO)
         Article 134 (Communicating a threat to a NCO)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20080221 :       Article (Failure to go)
         Article (Insubordination towards an SNCO)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20080424 :       Article 86 (Unauthorized absence , failed to check with the OOD on three occassions )
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:

- 20080516 :       Art icle , 2 specifications
         Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 20080424
         Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 20080425-20080430, 6 days)
         Article 112a (Wrongful use of marijuana)
         Article 134 ( Breaking restriction)
         Sentence :
SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20071030 :       For violations of Article 91 and 134 which resulted in NJP
- 20071102 :       For violations of Article 91 and 134 which resulted in NJP
- 20080221 :       For violations of Article 86, 91 and 92 which resulted in NJP
- 20080424 :       For violations of Article 86 which resulted in NJP
- 20080529 :       For violations of Article 86, 91, 92, 112a and 134 which resulted in three NJPs and one summary court-martial

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 20080430-2008052 3 ( 2 4 ) ; 20080715-2008080 7 (2 4 ) ”

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:          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. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT .

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. Needs medical attention for issues caused by being in the military.
2. One mistake should not haunt him for the rest of his life.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0218 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 five 6105 counseling warnings ; three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absent without leave, breaking restriction, 3 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordination/Disrespect towards a senior noncommissioned office r (NCO), 2 specifications), Article 92 (Fa ilure to obey lawful order), Article 134 (Communicating a threat to an NCO); and one summary court-martial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absent without leave, 2 specifications, 1 day & 6 days), Article 112a (Wrongful use of a controlled substance , marijuana – 24 ng/ml) (DoD cutoff level for marijuana is 15 ng/ml), and Article 134 (Breaking restriction). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana twice prior to entering the Marine Corps, acknowledged his complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 24 August 2003 . Based on the Article 112a violation , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of a dministrative separation processing , the Applicant his rights to submit a written statement and request an administrative board, but did consult with a qualified counsel.

Issue 1 : ( Nond ecisional ) The Applicant contends his medical issues were caused by being in the military. T he NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons . T he U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. For more information, refer to the Addendum , paragraphs titled Service Benefits and Medical Conditions and Misconduct .

Issue 2: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contend s he made one mistake. The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the service to maintain proper order and discipline. Article 112a is one such offense requiring, at a minimum, mandatory processing for an administrative separation, which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge. Commanders may also pursue a punitive discharge through a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge. Furthermore, as discussed above, violations of Articles 91 and 92, as well as violation of Article 112a, could have resulted in punishment substantially more harsh than the discharge the Applicant received. The NDRB determined the awarded characterization of discharge 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 his 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1300341

Original file (MD1300341.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 is not eligible for further reviews from the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews :...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801241

Original file (MD0801241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301372

Original file (MD1301372.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101739

Original file (MD1101739.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

These actions established a pattern of misconduct that warranted consideration for administrative separation. As such, the NDRB determined that an upgrade in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge is not appropriate and is not 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.
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801541

Original file (MD0801541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any additional statements and evidence of post The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801960

Original file (MD0801960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he deserves better than a “Bad Conduct” discharge after serving many years in the Marine Corps and taking part in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801789

Original file (ND0801789.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901152

Original file (MD0901152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.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.With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101277

Original file (MD1101277.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A.Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801547

Original file (MD0801547.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE).Discussion :().The Applicant regrets the mistakes he made while on active duty and desires to upgrade his discharge.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. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000322

Similar Decisions