Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200490

Original file (MD1200490.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120105

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)       20020524 - 20020728     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020729     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20051104      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 06 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 74
MOS: 0121
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20040325 :       Article (Absence without leave)
         Specification 1: On 1400-1630, 20031022
         Specification 2: On 0918-1630, 20040222
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: On 1331, 20031229
         Specification 2: On 0917, 20040222
         Article 115 (Malingering, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: On 1400-1630, 2001201-20031229
         Specification 2: On 1208-1450, 20040218
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20040514 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Talking back to NCO on 20040512
         Specification 2: Said he was not coming to work and that he would have to be charged on 20040513
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Move back to barracks , a dministrative s eparation Suspended: Administrative separation for 6 months

SCM:                      SPCM:          CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20040413 :       For your continuous pattern of misconduct.

- 20040830 :       For failure of mock PFT on 20040825. During this mock PFT session I failed to meet the minimum requirements for two required events resulting in a failure.

- 20041001 :       For PFT failure on 20040629 and being over body composition. Placed on BCP on 20040830.

- 20041029 :       For failure to comply with Marine Corps regulations pertaining to uniform size and fit.

- 20050112 :       For financial responsibility.

- 20050127 :       For your continuous pattern of misconduct.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 03 03 06 ”

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 contends he was not given sufficient reason for the discharge, it was too harsh, and no one explained to him the consequences or else he would not have signed the discharge papers .

Decision

Date : 20 1 2 1220 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 sta ndards 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 (Absence without leave , 2 specifications ) , Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 3 specifications ) , Article (Failure to obey order or regulation), and Article 115 (Malingering, 2 specifications ) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was not given sufficient reason for the discharge, it was too harsh, and no one explained to him the consequences or else he would not have signed the discharge papers. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Marine Corps. During the Applicant’s three years and three months of service, he received six retention counselings and was found guilty of committing numerous serious violations of the UCMJ at two NJPs. Additionally, his Proficiency and Conduct marks reflected below-average performance and behavior during his enlistment. The Applicant was given multiple opportunities to correct his poor behavior, received multiple formal counselings, and was punished on multiple occasions for his behavior. Being a Personnel Administration Clerk, he was undoubtedly aware of the bases for separation and so his contention that he was not given sufficient reason for his discharge does not have any merit. T he discharge was not too harsh but was completely in line with what others received for similar misconduct. Whether or not he signed his discharge papers would have had no bearing on his discharge. The Marine Corps did not need his permission to discharge him. T he Applicant was provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative board, but waived that right, thus accepting the discharge recommended in the letter of notification. He was properly notified, he waived his rights to consult with counsel, submit a statement, or appear before an administrative separation board, and he was properly discharged. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed multiple serious offense s and had a pattern of misconduct , that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions was warranted. 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301131

Original file (MD1301131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201659

Original file (MD1201659.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...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501458

Original file (MD0501458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Applicant chose not to make a statement.040109: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Feb 04 due to Pending Disciplinary Charges/Non-judicial Punishment. Article 92: Specification 1: In that Lance Corporal B_ F. O_(Applicant), U.S. Marine Corps, on active duty, did, at Camp Pendleton, CA, on or about 11 December 2003, violate a lawful general order, to wit: paragraph 6310.c of Base...
USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00892

Original file (MD03-00892.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 010612: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO’s NJP dated 010507.010614: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).A characterization of service of under other than honorable...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301519

Original file (MD1301519.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his performance warrants consideration for a change to Honorable or Uncharacterized.During the Applicant’s less than two years of service, he received two retention warnings and was found guilty at three NJPs and a Summary Court-Martial of violating several UCMJ articles. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900594

Original file (MD0900594.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PFC failed to show up to the scheduled appointment.- 20010918: For leaving on a 96 while on duty section and duty at SRD supply on 20010902. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101605

Original file (ND1101605.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to receive health benefits. ” 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901481

Original file (ND0901481.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 medical records, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300586

Original file (MD1300586.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends he received an Honorable discharge certificate from the Marine Corps. 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 shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for 15 years from the date of discharge. ” Additional...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601094

Original file (ND0601094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation None. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD PROCEDUREDate Notified:20040804Reason for Discharge:MISCONDUCT - Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20040804Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)Administrative Discharge Board date: NOT...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200490

Similar Decisions