Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000998

Original file (MD1000998.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100310

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)                Active: 20010212 - 20010719
20030114 - 20030715
20040204 - 20050108
20051207 - 20061130
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20001213     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20071126      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service:
         Inactive:        Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 16 D a y ( s )
         Active: Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 20 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 79
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol MM (2) (2) AFRM(2) SMCRM

Periods of UA / CONF : 20041024-20041207 (44 days) /

NJP:
- 20041210 :      Article (Unauthorized absence for 44 days)
         Awarded: Suspended:
- 20061002 :      Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation by using anabolic steroids)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

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 :

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. The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because the CO recommended he be retained per the pre-NJP agreement and that four other Marines were retained.
2 . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on his record of service.

Decision

Date: 20110428 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence for 44 days) and Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation by using anabolic steroids). 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 26 October 2000 . Based on the violation of the Marine Corps illegal drug policy , processing for administrative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified cou n se l and to request an administrative board , but exercised his rights to submit a written statement for considerat ion by the separating authority.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because the CO recommend ed he be retained per the pre-NJP agreement and that four other Marines were retained . After reviewing the pre-NJP agreement and other documents recommending administrative separation, the command complied with the pre-NJP agreement by recomme nding to the separating authority that the Applicant be retained. Unfortunately, the separating authority did not agree with the command and directed the Applicant be discharged. Additionally, the end result (retention) of the other Marines, that committed the same act, has no bearing in the Applicant’s case. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s issue s are without merit. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on his record of service. Despite a Marine’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. While the Applicant’s separation was warranted, his command should have retained him on active duty until his administrative separation was complete instead of adjudicating his misconduct and releasing him from active duty with an Honorable characterization. The same pattern of events occurred in his prior mobilization when he went in an unauthorized absence for 44 days. The command adjudicated the misconduct and released him from active duty with an Honorable characterization. Once released from active duty with an Honorable characterization of service, despite his misconduct , his command cannot then subsequently discharge him based on misconduct during the Honorable period of service. The NDRB determined that an upgrade is warranted . Relief 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 Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall . 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200800

Original file (MD1200800.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210,...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300303

Original file (MD1300303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400992

Original file (MD1400992.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 | 2011_Marine | MD1101832

Original file (MD1101832.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100243

Original file (MD1100243.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19960110 - 19960630Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19960701Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:19971118Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)05 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:54MOS: 0300Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):/Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200526

Original file (MD1200526.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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001658

Original file (ND1001658.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s conductreflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Sailors, especially considering his job specialty, and falls short of what is required for an upgrade.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100305

Original file (MD1100305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant identified three decisional issues related to the equity of the discharge; additionally, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.The Applicant’s enlistment record reflects entry into military service The Applicant requested reenlistment, but was not medically qualified due to his limited duty status; however, he was...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100112

Original file (MD1100112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.The NDRB reviewed the Applicant’s post-service documentation and official service record, and took into consideration his testimony, his in-service proficiency and conduct average - before discharge - of 4.7/4.8, and the...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100281

Original file (MD1100281.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 the administrative separation process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge.However, based on Applicant and witness testimony, and the evidence presented at the hearing, the awarded...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000998

Similar Decisions