Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100019

Original file (MD1100019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101005

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)       20060609 - 20060717     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060718     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20091120      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 3 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 72
MOS: 3432
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF : UA: 20090817 - 20090826 (10 days) / CONF NONE

NJP:

- 20061117 :      Article (Fail to obey a lawful regulation, by wrongfully drinking under the legal age limit)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:

CC Arrest:

- 20090817 :       Offense: Domestic abuse, malicious wounding, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, pointing/bran d ishing a firearm , Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court trial date is 20090917, and General District Court hearing date is 20091027 .

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20070726 :       For your assignment to the Marine Corps BCP

- 20080902 :       For the continued demonstration of extraordinarily poor judgment in your decision making abilities

- 20090429 :       For destruction of government property

- 20090731 :       For wil lfully disobeying an order on three separate occasions and f ail ure to go at the prescribed appointed place of duty to wit, his work section

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”

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 . Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 128 , Assault .

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends his command discharged him for commission of a serious offense before the conclusion of civilian court pro ceedings, during which he was found innocent of the serious offenses for which he was discharged .

Decision

Date: 20 1 20104 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 6105 counseling warnings and one non-judicial punishment for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification). It also reflected one civilian arrest for domestic abuse, malicious wounding, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and pointing/brandishing a firearm. At least one of the aforementioned offenses was closely related to Article 128 (Assault) of the UCMJ and could have resulted in a punitive discharge , which constitutes a serious offense, had it been adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. A military or civilian conviction is not required for discharge base d on the commission of a serious offense. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his command discharged him for commission of a serious offense before the conclusion of civilian court proceedings, during which he was found innocent of the serious offenses for which he was discharged . The Applicant was arrested by civilian authorities for domestic abuse, malicious wounding, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and pointing/brandishing a firearm. At least one of these offenses is closely related to Article 128 (Assault) of the UCMJ and could have resulted in a punitive discharge , which constitutes a serious offense, had it been adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. A military or civilian conviction is not required for a discharge base d on the commission of a serious offense. Therefore, there is no requirement for the command to wait for the courts to adjudicate the offenses. In addition, t he government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evide nce to support his claim. The Applicant did not provide any documentation to support his claim that he was found innocent of the serious offenses . His s tatement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Without documentary proof, the NDRB presumed regularity in that a serious offense was committed. Therefore, the discharge was proper and equitable. 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 for additional information.

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

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400915

Original file (ND1400915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080729 - 20090526Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20090527Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20111012Highest Rank/Rate:BM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 04 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 47EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.5(4)Behavior:3.7(4)OTA: 3.54Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301706

Original file (ND1301706.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000357

Original file (ND1000357.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. Summary: After a thorough...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100886

Original file (ND1100886.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his honorable 19 years of service outweigh his misconduct. Representation: NONE 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301170

Original file (ND1301170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available records, to include significant, credible evidence submitted by the Applicant. ” 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201881

Original file (ND1201881.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800650

Original file (ND0800650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The record reflects the Commander, Naval Medical Center, San Diego notified the Applicant of his proposed administrative processing by reason of misconduct due to the civilian conviction and commission of a serious offense. Based on the evidence contained in the record, the Board determined the Applicant received proper notice of administrative separation processing and was provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative board, but waived that right, thus accepting the...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500373

Original file (ND1500373.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...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600947

Original file (MD0600947.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In addition to the remaining civilian charges (specifically assault and brandishing an unregistered weapon), the Applicant was awarded nonjudicial punishment for violating a military protective order when he visited his wife on 050114. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil ” .The names, and...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001326

Original file (MD1001326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s combat service and PTSD were considered and did mitigate the effect of the misconduct in the final characterization of his service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions vice a Bad Conduct Discharge. As such, the NDRB determined that an upgrade in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge was not appropriate and is not warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100019

Similar Decisions