Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100890

Original file (MD1100890.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110222

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)       19860412 - 19870104     Active: 19870105 - 19910429 HON
                                    USMC 19910430 - 19950428 HON
                                    USMC 19950428 - 19990125 HON
                                    USMC 19990126 - 20020311 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020312     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20061018      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 07 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 41
MOS: 0629/8411
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): NA Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle EX (5) Pistol SS NDSM (2) GWOTSM GCM (5) MCRR SSDR MUC LOA (2)

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP: NONE        SCM: NONE CC: NONE       Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

SPCM: 1

- 20040624 :       Art icle 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Wrongfully fraternizing with a lance corporal
         Specification 2: Wrongful use of Federal Government communications system and equipment by viewing pornography and dating and matchmaker websites
         Specification 3: Wrongful use of Federal Government communications by viewing marketing, wholesale, business, and banking loan credit counseling firms for the purpose of personal and financial gain
         Article 134 (General Article, 5 specifications )
         Specification 1: Being indebted to a lance corporal in the sum of about $900.00
         Specification 2: Utter a check in the amount of $730.00 to a lance corporal and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment
         Specification 3: Utter a check for the purpose of cash advance in the sum of $647.50 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment
         Specification 4: Utter a check for the purpose of cash advance in the sum of $645.00 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment
         Specification 5: Utter a check for the purpose of cash advance in the sum of $631.35 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment
        Sentence : RIR to E-3 FOP CONF 45 days (20040506 - 20040511, 6 days and 2004051 3- 20040623, 31 days)

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

1. The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because it was based on an isolated incident in 19 years and 10 months of service with no other adverse action.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0517 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation : 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 such change is warranted. 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. 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. The Applicant ’ s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service included one S pecial C ourt- M artial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Fail ure to obey order or regulation , 3 specifications : Specification 1: Wrongfully fraternizing with a lance corporal , Specification 2: Wrongful use of Federal Government communications system and equi pment by viewing pornography, dating and matchmaker websites , and Specification 3: Wrongful use of Federal Government communications by viewing marketing, wholesale, business, and banking loan credit counseling firms for the purpose of personal and financial gain ) and Article 134 (General Article, 5 specifications : Specification 1: Being indebted to a lance corporal in the sum of about $900.00 , Specification 2: Utter a check in the amount of $730.00 to a lance corporal and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment , Specification 3: Utter a check for the purpose of cash advance in the sum of $647.50 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment , Specification 4: Utter a check for the purpose of cash advance in the sum of $645.00 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment , and Specification 5: Utter a check for the purpose of cash advance in the sum of $631.35 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment ). The Applicant was found guilty at Special Court-Martial and , following confinement and appellat e review, was separated with a Bad Conduct Discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because it was based on an isolated incident in 19 years and 10 months of service with no other adverse action. The record shows the Applicant was tried and convicted at S pecial C ourt- M artial for numerous offenses that each would warrant confinement and a Bad Conduct Discharge in their own right. The Applicant’s misconduct was egregious not only for the offenses themselves but due to the repeated nature of the misconduct. The Applicant’s sentence, including the Bad Conduct Discharge , was proper and equitable. After carefully considering the Applicant’s record of service and matters submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined clemency w as not warranted in this case. Clemency 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 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00459

Original file (ND04-00459.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “To Whom It May Concern:Applicant) am requesting a review of my military record to obtain an Honorable Discharge versus a General, Under Honorable Discharge to obtain my education benefits from the Veterans Affairs Office. Therefore, she was discharged from the naval service with a characterization of General, under honorable conditions.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03783

Original file (BC 2007 03783.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03783 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reentry Code (RE) code of 2B, (Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge) be changed to one that will allow her to reenter military service. On 12 October 2006, the Air...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00046

Original file (FD2003-00046.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

m AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL : Oy 2 NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES NO xX OS MOVE OF THE BOARD” 7) MEMBERS SITTING HON] GEN goTHc ~~] OTHER ISSUES ~ A93.11, A94.53 INDEX NUMBER (UNS EXBOBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD A47.00 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400297

Original file (MD1400297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief deniedSummary: 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 .Since 15 years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not eligible for a personal appearance hearing. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300879

Original file (MD1300879.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...
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00772

Original file (MD00-00772.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 920908: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (3 specs):Specification 1: Make and utter check #578 to MWR 0150 for the amount of $14.25 and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment on 920718. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued940419: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02457

Original file (BC-2004-02457.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

He was sentenced to be discharged from the Air Force with a bad conduct discharge. They indicated based upon the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600708

Original file (ND0600708.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 19930712 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. ” The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00326

Original file (FD2003-00326.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE B/G [dy fe COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD CASE NUMBER FD-2003-00326 HEARING DATE 12 Nov 2003 Case heard at Washington, D.C. submit an application to the AFBCMR SIGNATURE OE SAF/MRBR 550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600214

Original file (ND0600214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) and that the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed. The separation authority directed that the Applicant be discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100890

Similar Decisions