Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100171

Original file (MD1100171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMCR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101026

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)       NONE      Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011114     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : 8 Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20020804      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service:
         Inactive:        Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 0 1 D a y ( s )
         Active: Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 22 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 39
MOS: 9900
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA/ CONF : UA 20020214-20020219 (5 days) CONF

NJP:
- 20020227 :       Article ( Drugs - marijuana)
         Awarded: NFIR Suspended:

- 2002 0514 :      Article (UA 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failed to be at his appointed place of duty on or about 1800, 020401and did remain so absent until 1100, 020416
         Specification 2: Failed to be at his appointed place of duty, The Rehabilitation Center on or about 0901, 020221
         Specification 3: Failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, The Rehabilitation Center located aboard SOI on or about 0846, 020325
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20020620 :       Article (UA from 20020601-20020602, 1 day)
         Article (General: Breaking restriction)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20020304 :       For UA from 1800, 20020214-1800, 20020219 (5 days)

- 20020417 :       For UA from 1800, 20020401-0130, 20020417 (16 days)

- 20020620 :       For UA from 1105, 20020601-1055, 20020602 (1 day)

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Block 24 , C haracter of Service, should read “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS”
         “ (5) 20020214-20020219, (16) 20020401-20020417, (1) 20020601-20020602 ”

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 P1900.16F), 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 desires to improve his employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant contends he went UA , because he felt he was being punished for being injured while in the rehabilitation platoon.
3.       Post-service conduct .
Decision

Date : 2012 0119             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : county of rockland veterans service agency

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 warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence, ), Article ( Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance, : marijuana ) , and Article 134 (General Article , 1 specification: Breaking restriction) . The Applicant acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 8 Oct 2001 . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to improve his employment opportunities. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he went UA , because he felt he was being punished for being injured while in the rehabilitation platoon. The record shows the Applicant had a clear pattern of misconduct that was not isolated to a single event of poor judgment or due to depression regarding his shoulder injury. In his statement upon separation , the Applicant made it clear he committed the various offenses “…due to lack of motivation and not wanting to stay in the military.” His statement went on to say, “These probably won’t be my last offenses.” The Applicant’s misconduct clearly warranted administrative separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization. There is no evidence establishing any mitigation for his misconduct or basis for a c hange in characterization. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant requested the NDRB consider post - service conduct as a basis to gain a more thorough understanding of performance and conduct during the period of service under review . The Applicant submitted five character reference s from friends and family. The Applicant ’ s post-service documentation efforts need to be more encompassing. He could have provided documentation as specified 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 - s ervice conduct establishes a reason to change the characterization or narrative reason. Due to the limited documentation provided in support of a post-service conduct review, and in light of the serious and repeated nature of the Applicant’s misconduct, 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 . 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901509

Original file (MD0901509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenseshe committed.Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900655

Original file (ND0900655.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the statements of post-service conduct alone did not support an upgrade in his discharge characterization. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700405

Original file (ND0700405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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 . ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700212

Original file (ND0700212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found no evidence that the Applicant’s discharge was fair.When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800899

Original file (ND0800899.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000635

Original file (MD1000635.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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100249

Original file (MD1100249.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.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900530

Original file (ND0900530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Record of service. While the Board applauds the Applicant’s post service efforts, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct is not sufficient to warrant a discharge upgrade. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900416

Original file (ND0900416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB reviews discharges on a case-by-case basis and no evidence can be found in the Applicant’s service record to support his statement. The NDRB is not reviewing other service member’s misconduct or administrative or disciplinary actions against them. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801692

Original file (MD0801692.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any other supporting documents in his behalf. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100171

Similar Decisions