Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002168

Original file (MD1002168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100907

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)       19980713 - 19981012     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19981013     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20021118      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 06 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 82
MOS: 3381
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle CoC (2)

Periods of UA / CONF : 20000530 - 20000705, 37 days / CONF:

NJP:

SCM:
- 20000406 :      Article (UA), 2 specifications
         Specification 1: Fail to go to appointed place of duty 0400, 20000225
         Specification 2: Fail to go to appointed place of duty 0330, 20000225
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19991119 :       For absence without leave in that applicant was UA from 19991102 to 19991104 (3 days) .

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ RIFLE EXPERT BADGE , NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, CERTIFICATE OF COMMENDATION (2) ”
         “ (3) 19991102-19991104, (37) 20000530-20000705 ”

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. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION .

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 P roficiency and C onduct (Pro/Con) marks are erroneous for several reasons.

Decision

Date : 2011 1208 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 discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warning and for of the UCMJ: Article ( , : Failure to go to appointed place of duty and 37 days ). Due to the Applicant’s Pro/Con marks of 3.7/3.3, he received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service upon completion o f his required active service.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his Pro/Con marks are erroneous for several reasons. He believes he improperly received marks of 0.0 on two occasions , believes Pro/Con marks were reversed on 31 Jan 2002, and also believes “NA” marks hurt his overall Pro/Con average since no values were added on 28 Feb 2000 and upon release from active duty . The record showed the Applicant had significant misconduct during his enlistment. His Pro/Con marks were well below the standard to receive an Honorable characterization. The NDRB recalculated the Applicant’s marks , removing one of the 0.0 marks disputed by the Applicant as well as reversing the Pro/Con marks of 31 Jan 2002 and eliminating the “NA” marks from 28 Jan 00 and upon release from active duty ( since there is no equitable way to determine what those marks should have been , they were just eliminated and not counted in the recalculated average) . The recalculated C onduct mark average was 3.55, which is still f ar short of the required 4.0 . Therefore, the NDRB determined an upgrade to Honorable would be inappropriate based upon the Applicant’s issue s. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, 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, 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 | MD1300261

Original file (MD1300261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service reflects he received overall Con marks of 3.9 based upon 12 gradings, which includes a mark of “0.0” as a result of being declared a deserter. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801414

Original file (MD0801414.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), failure to maintain grooming standards Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300255

Original file (MD1300255.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. ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe the...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002048

Original file (MD1002048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301304

Original file (MD1301304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant reached the end of his obligated active service and was discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service due to his average enlistment Conduct mark of 3.7.: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants to use the GI Bill.The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001924

Original file (MD1001924.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, based on an administrative impropriety, the Board determined that the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” 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 a former member has been discharged for...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300410

Original file (MD1300410.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1002227

Original file (MD1002227.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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600873

Original file (MD0600873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20021223 by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a disability (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902464

Original file (MD0902464.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20001030 - 20010813Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010814Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20051202Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)19 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:49MOS: 0311Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002168

Similar Decisions