Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101920

Original file (MD1101920.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110812

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)       19960814 - 19961104     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19961105     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19970919      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 15 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 66
MOS: 6300
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /          Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF :

NJP :

- 19970617 :       Article (Absence without leave, to wit: security watch)
         Awarded: Suspended: Suspension vacated 19970703

- 19970703 :      Article (Absence without leave , to wit: security watch )
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19970414 :       For using poor judgment by being unauthorized absence from morning formation on three different occasions. This behavior will not be tolerated.

- 19970624 :       For your diagnosed disorder, specifically your attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

- 19970624 :       For your academic drop from the AVA course of instruction.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ ”
         “ MISCONDUCT ”

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
31 January 1997 until 31 August 2001.

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 wants an upgrade to improve his employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity contributed to his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends his diagnosis of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) contributed to his misconduct.
4.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0913 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 and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , two specifications). Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The Applicant was not eligible for an administrative separation board as he was not discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants an upgrade to improve his employment 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity contributed to his misconduct. The NDRB recognizes that many of our servicemembers are young at the time they enlist for service, however, most still manage to serve honorably. While some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB does not view a member’s claim of immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his diagnosis of ADHD contributed to his misconduct. When reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. However, the NDRB generally does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition or diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to excuse the Applicant’s misconduct. Relief denied.

4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. Howe ver, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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 establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions). 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100434

Original file (MD1100434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and special court-martial record of trial, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201107

Original file (MD1201107.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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801627

Original file (ND0801627.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 Complaint Procedures : If you believe that 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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500780

Original file (MD1500780.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling stating the Applicant is not recommended for reenlistment by reason of Fraudulent Enlistment for: Adjustment disorder; History of ADHD. During the enlistment process into the Marine Corps, the Applicant was asked to provide any medical history of counseling or treatment for a mental health condition which he denied. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201671

Original file (ND1201671.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge characterization does not accurately represent his overall service. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500857

Original file (ND1500857.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400761

Original file (ND1400761.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

No other narrative reason other than Fraudulent Entry more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200856

Original file (MD1200856.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.In accordance with Paragraph 1004 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, an Honorable characterization of service upon the expiration of active duty is appropriate when the quality of a Marine’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001873

Original file (ND1001873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20011004 - 20011106Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20011107Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20011204Highest Rank/Rate: AALength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)28 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 31EvaluationMarks:Performance:N/ABehavior:N/AOTA: N/AAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401047

Original file (MD1401047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20110706 - 20120624Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20120625Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20120717Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)23 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:55MOS: NONEProficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NOB/NOBFitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101920

Similar Decisions