Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001962

Original file (MD1001962.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100804

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)       20050429 - 20050711     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050712     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20080618      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 08 D a ys
Education Level: 11th grade / received          AFQT: 45
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): (NFIR) / (NFIR) Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle MM , NDSM , GWOTSM

Period of UA : 20060206 – 20060207 (2 days); 20060209 – 20070207 (592 days);
Periods of Confinement: 20070924 – 20070926 (2 days - IHCA); 20070926 – 20071112 ( 48 days – Pre-trial); 2007 1113 – 20071207 ( 2 3 days – Post-trial )
Period of Time Lost: 20071218 – 20071226 ( 9 days – Voluntary Appellate Leave )

NJP: 2

- 20051208 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, stored ammunition in wall locker)
         Awarded: FOP RESTR Suspended:

- 20060207 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 0631, 20060206 - 0530, 20060207)
         Awarded: FOP RESTR EPD Suspended:

SCM: NONE         CC:

SPCM:

- 20071113 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 20060209 - 20070923, 592 days, apprehended)
         Sentence : BCD, FOP , CONF 90 days (20070926 - 20071207, 73 days)
        Suspended: Per Pre-trial agreement, all confinement in excess of 1 65 days

Retention Warning Counseling : 1

- 20051208 :       For storing ammunition in wall locker

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

Non-decisional Issues : The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge in order to enhance employment opportunities.

Decisional Issues : The Applicant did not identify any decisional issues related to the equity of his discharge , however, by submission of his application , the NDRB considered all factors of the discharge to determine if clemency was warranted . The Applicant requested a change in the characterization of his service at discharge to Uncharacterized.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 1117 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation : none

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

In reviewing discharges, the NDRB 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. As such, the Applicant ’ s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this par ticular case merited clemency.

The Applicant’s service record indicates he entered military service at age 20 on a four-year enlistment contract under the Infantry training option . The Applicant’s enlistment record reflects his entry into military service with waivers to enlistment and induction standards for exceeding the USMC height/weight standards and for not meeting minimal educational requirements . The highest rank achieved by the Applicant during his enlistment was E- 1 / Private .

The Applicant’s record of service include s one 6105 retention- counseling warning and two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave , 20060206 - 20060207) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) . Moreover, the Applicant’s service record reflects a punitive conviction and punishment as adjudged by a S pecial C ourt -M artial on 17 October 2003. The App licant was subject to trial by S pecial C ourt -M artial for violation of Article 86 (Absence without leave, 20060209 - 20070923 , 592 days , ended by apprehen sion by military law enforcement personnel). A qualified legal defense counsel represented the Applicant during his trial by Special Court-Martial. The Applicant was tried in accordance with a signed pre-tr i al agreement in which he pled guilty before a judge alone . Given the facts of the case, the military trial judge awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge, a forfeiture of pay for 3 months , and confinement for a period of 90 days. The case was submitted for review to the U.S. Navy–Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals with out assignment s of error; it was reviewed and the findings were affirmed. Subsequently, the Navy Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity ordered the Bad Conduct Discharge executed. The Applicant’s final discharge was effect ed on 18 June 2008 .

Nondecisional Issue - The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge in order to facilitate future employment opportunities. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of facilitating employment opportunities . Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of clemency based on matters of equity of a discharge when considering a change to a punitive Bad Conduct Discharge . As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

Decisional Issue: (Clemency/Equity) - CLEMENCY NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant did not identify any decisional issues related to the equity of his discharge , however, by submission of his application, the NDRB considered all factors of the discharge to determine if clemency was warranted. The Applicant had requested a change in the characterization of his service to Uncharacterized. A separation initiated while a member is in an entry level status (within the first 180 days of continuous active duty) may receive an Uncharacterized characterization except when an Under Other Than Honorable characterization is authorized under reasons for separation and is warranted by circumstances of the case. The Applicant was not eligible for an Uncharacterized discharge , because he had more than 180 days of service at the time he committed the offense that warranted his discharge .

The Applicant’s service record documents a period of service of approximately 7 months prior to his absenting himself from his unit; in this short period of time, he was subject to two n onjudicial p unishment s for u nauthorized a bsence and disobedience of lawful written orders. Two days after returning from a period of u nauthorized a bsence and receiving nonjudicial punishment, the Applicant absented himself from his unit, without proper authority, and remained so absent for 592 days, ending only due to the apprehension of the Applicant by military police authority. The Applicant ’ s misconduct documents a pattern of misconduct related to unauthorized absence and a general failure to conform to military rules and regulations. Due to the Applicant ’ s refusal to conform to the expected conduct of a United States Marine after administrative punishment and retention counseling, coupled with the need to ensure good order and discipline of the service, the Command referred the final unauthorized absence charge to trial by Special Court - Martial. The stated misconduct resulted in the awarding of a punitive Bad Conduct Discharge, a forfeiture of pay, and confinement for a period of 90 days.

The NDRB recognizes that many of our service members are young at the time they enlist for service, however, most manage to serve their enlistment s honorably. While some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB does not view a member’s youth or immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct, especially deliberate and repetitive misconduct. Moreover, despite a servicemember’s prior record of service , certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Nav al Service to maintain proper order and discipline. The pattern of documented unauthorized absences and general contempt for good order and discipline is not minor misconduct and supports the findings of the court - martial in awarding a Bad Conduct Discharge. The NDRB found that the evidence of record, along with the Applicant’s statement and supporting documentation, did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. Given the short period of the Applicant’s service, coupled with the repetitive and extensive nature of the misconduct, ended only by apprehension, the NDRB agreed unanimously that the punishment, as awarded, was warranted and was equitable; relief in the form of clemency is not warranted. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that clemency was not warranted. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE 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 | 2007_Marine | MD0701092

Original file (MD0701092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate.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. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300427

Original file (MD1300427.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 | 2014_Navy | ND1401457

Original file (ND1401457.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 (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901016

Original file (ND0901016.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900110

Original file (ND0900110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901623

Original file (ND0901623.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901030

Original file (MD0901030.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. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201860

Original file (ND1201860.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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700493

Original file (ND0700493.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1.Request change of RE Code to reenlist in Army2. Further, the Applicant's misconduct is clearly documented. 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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20030926 -...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300173

Original file (ND1300173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19910628 - 19910806Active: 19910807 - 19970430 HON USN 19970501 - 20000601 HON USN 20000602 - 20030914 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20030915Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070529Highest Rank/Rate:AD1Length of Service:Years Months15 DaysEducation Level:AFQT:...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001962

Similar Decisions