Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101157

Original file (MD1101157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110405

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)       20030204 - 20030 406     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030 407     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060714      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 25 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 74
MOS: 3043
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20050609 :       Article (Failure to obey order or regulation and dereliction of duties , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to obey lawful order
         Specification 2: Dereliction in performance of duties
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20050815 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (Breaking restriction)
         Awarded : Susp ended: (1 mo)

SCM:     SPCM:

C IV ARREST :

- 20050701 :       Charges: P ossess drug paraphernalia, possess Schedule III Control led Substances, conspire sell/deliver Schedule I Control led Substances, possess with intent Manufacture Sell and Deliver Schedule I Control led Substances, sell Schedule I Control led Substances, deliver Schedule I Control led Substance , possession with intent Manufacture Sell and Deliver Marijuana, Manufacture Marijuana, maintain Vehicle/Dwelling place for Control led Substance (felony), two charges of posses s stolen motor vehicle .

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20050815 :       For violation of A rticle 134, breaking restriction

- 20050817 :       For company NJP conviction on 20050620 for violation of A rticle 92 (x2) and Battalion NJP on 20050817 for violation of A rticle s 92 and 134

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 03 04 07 ”
         “ MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6 ”
         “ GKQ1 ”

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 . The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT .

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 that he was found Not Guilty on all charges.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0313 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. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Failure to obey order or regulation , 3 specifications ) and Article ( Restriction, breaking , ) , and one civilian arrest for the charges of attempted robbery with a weapon and attempted felonious conspiracy. The Applicant was found Not Guilty for these civilian convictions . Based on the other civilian charges for which the Applicant was held : (1) Possess drug paraphernalia ; (2) Possess Schedule III Controlled Substances; (3) C onspir e to sell/deliver Schedule I Control led Substances ; (4) Possess with intent to m anufacture , s ell , and d eliver Schedule I Control led Substance ; (5) Sell Schedule I Controlled Substances; (6) Deliver Schedule I Controlled Substances; (7) Possess with intent to m anufacture , sell, and deliver m arijuana ; (8) Manufacture marijuana; and (9) M aintain v ehicle/ d welling / place for Control led Substance (felony), t he Applicant’s commanding officer n otified the Applicant of the decision to separate him for Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense). When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel and request an administrative board, but waived his right to submit a written statement . The Applicant appeared before an administrative separation board who found that, by a 3-0 vote, the allegations were supported by a preponderance of the evidence and recommended, by a 3-0 vote, that the Applicant should be separated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. The Separation Authority concurred with the recommendations and ordered the Applicant to be discharged for Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) per Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, paragraph 6210.6. The NDRB did note an administrative error on the Applicant’s DD Form 214 with respect to the Separation Authority and corrected it from 6210.5 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse) to 6210.6 (Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense).

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that he was fo und Not Guilty on all charges. The Applicant may have been found Not Guilty for robbery with a dangerous weapon and felonious conspiracy, but there is no record of any not guilty verdict on the charges for which he was notified of separation. A Marine may be processed for separation for commission of a serious military or civilian offense when t he specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge would be authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the UCMJ. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction, however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. In addition to the charges specified above, the Applicant also had two NJPs for violating UCMJ Article 92 (3 specifications), which is considered a serious offense and carries a maximum penalty of a punitive discharge if adjudicated at a General or Special Court-Martial. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. 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 Under Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in th e member’s terminated health. 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901024

Original file (ND0901024.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall , DRUG ABUSE.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902617

Original file (ND0902617.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Retention Warning Counseling: 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000220

Original file (ND1000220.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.Naval Military Personnel...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500518

Original file (MD0500518.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Due to that felony charge I, I was discharged by the Marine Corps 8 months later. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201062

Original file (MD1201062.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102106

Original file (MD1102106.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues Nondecisional issues:The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge in order to facilitate employment opportunities and disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs.Decisional issues: (1) The Applicant contends that his misconduct of record was the result of undiagnosed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and alcohol dependency,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012247

Original file (20140012247.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. The applicant was 17 years of age, had satisfactory completed training and had served for approximately a year and a half before any negative incidents were documented. The applicant has not provided and the record does not contain any evidence that he was hospitalized for a back condition, and/or was on profile...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000833

Original file (MD1000833.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902247

Original file (MD0902247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. For additional information, call 1-877-222-VETS (8387).This case was processed and adjudicated in accordance with Section 512 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501386

Original file (MD0501386.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). Commanding Officer’s comments: “Lance Corporal J_(Applicant) was convicted on 13 August 2002 on felony charges of drug possession and sentenced to pay a $500.00 fine and serve 1 year on probation. The Applicant’s service was marred by nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violation of Article 112a (wrongful use, possession of controlled...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101157

Similar Decisions