Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001648

Original file (MD1001648.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100623

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)       19980723 - 19981115     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19981116     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20020611      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 26 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 31
MOS: 0351
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /          Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol NDSM SSD R HSM

Periods of UA / CONF : 20011102-20011126 (24 days) / 20020311-20020403 (21 days)

NJP: 1
- 20001220 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward noncommissioned officer (NCO) - 2 specifications)
         Article 112 (Drunk on duty)
         Article 134 (Incapacitated in the performance of duty)
         Article 134 ( D runk and disorderly conduct)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM: 1
- 20020327 :       Art icle 86 ( Unauthorized absence for 24 days)
         Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, disobeyed lawful order)
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward staff noncommissioned officer by being disrespectful in language to SNCOs)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation by wrongfully wearing civilian attire)
         Article 134 ( Disorderly conduct )
         Sentence : RIR E-1 FOP CONF 30 days

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling : 2
- 20001222 :       For disrespectful in language toward an NCO

- 20020311 :       F or alcohol - related incident with military authorities on 20020310. For total disregard for obeying orders and regulations, and conduct which is prejudicial to good order and discipline

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 6210, MISCONDUCT , 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 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 he lost three ranks and got an OTH for being UA .

Decision

Date: 20110 804 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 6105 counseling warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Insubordinate conduct toward NCO - 2 specifications), Article 112 (Drunk on duty), Article 134 (Incapacitated in the performance of duty) , and Article 134 ( D runk and disorderly conduct) , and Summary Court-Martial for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 24 days), Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, disobeyed lawful order), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward staff noncommissioned officer by being disrespectful in language to SNCOs), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation by wrongfully wearing civilian attire), and Article 134 (Disorderly conduct) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant exercised or waived rights to consult with a qualified counse l and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, but based on the S eparation C ode (Block 25) on his DD Form 214 he waived his rights to request an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because he lost three ranks and received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge for being UA ; in addition, he provided a letter from the Department of Veterans A ffairs (VA) saying he ha d Honorable service . T he VA’s decisional letter is not binding on the NDRB. Decisions reached by the VA to determine if former servicemembers rate certain VA benefits do not affect previous discharge decisions made by the Marine Corps. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits is different than that used by the Marine Corps when determining a member’s discharge characterization. R egarding his separation , the NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the Marine Corps. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Over his 3 years and 6 months of service, the Applicant was found guilty of multiple UCMJ violations at an NJP and a Summary Court-Martial. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant ’s conduct constituted a significant departure from that expected of a Marine, that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a n Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 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 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 | 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 | 2010_Marine | MD1001589

Original file (MD1001589.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 . ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900703

Original file (ND0900703.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. 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 the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900729

Original file (MD0900729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM:...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400287

Original file (MD1400287.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 remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100827

Original file (ND1100827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

It is evident that this service member should not be recommended for retention in the Naval Service … .” After considering all the available evidence regarding the Applicant’s misconduct, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500612

Original file (MD0500612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Commanding Officer further stated: “I personally intervened a year ago to deny an Administrative Discharge request on Private S_ (Applicant) submitted by the Commanding Officer of HMH-463. The names, and votes of the members of the 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
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300666

Original file (MD1300666.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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100854

Original file (MD1100854.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.Per the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, an Honorable characterization upon expiration of active service is appropriate when the quality of the Marine’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel. ”...
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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001648

Similar Decisions