Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200706

Original file (MD1200706.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120208

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)       20070608 - 20071216     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20071217     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20101020      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 71
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:     SPCM: CC:

SCM:

- 20100211 :       Art icle ( Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: on or about 20100125 in the parking lot adjacent to building 84, physically controlled a vehicle to wit a passenger car, in a reckless manner, while impaired by benzodiazepine, by hitting a stationary vehicle belonging to Corporal L____ and did thereby cause damage to said vehicle.
         Specification 2 : on or ab o ut 20100125 in the parking lot adjacent to building 84, physically controlled a vehicle to wit a passenger car, in a reckless manner, while impaired by benzodiazepine, by hitting a stationary vehicle belonging to Sergeant W____ and did thereby cause damage to said vehicle.
         Specification 3: on or ab o ut 20100125 in the parking lot adjacent to building 84, physically controlled a vehicle to wit a passenger car, in a reckless manner, while impaired by benzodiazepine, by hitting a stationary vehicle belonging to LCpl G ____ and did thereby cause damage to said vehicle.
         Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , benzodiazepine and OH-Alpazolam)
         Sentence :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20091021 :       For failure to be in formation at 0630 on 20091020

- 20100121: For failure to be in formation at 0630 on 20100120

- 20100811 :      For conviction at a trial by summary court-martial on 20100211

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 multiple recommendations for a General discharge show that he was remorseful, and his final superior recommended referral to a mental health counselor, which shows his command knew he was dealing with depression.
2.       The Applicant contends h e was discharged for a crime that he had already been adequately punished for.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1109          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. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and for of the UCMJ: Article ( Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel , ) and Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances, benzodiazepine and OH-Alpazolam, ) . The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 04 June 2007. Based on the Article 112a violation , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( Equity ) . The Applicant contends multiple recommendations for a General discharge show that he was remorseful, and his final superior recommended referral to a mental health counselor, which shows his command knew he was dealing with depression. Chain-of-command recommendations during discharge processing are just that, recommendations. The Separation Authority is the person who makes the ultimate decision as to the characterization of service. In the Applicant’s case, the Commanding General, 2nd Marine Division was the Separation Authority and ordered the Applicant to be discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions after reviewing all of the facts and circumstances of the case. If the Applicant was suffering from depression, there were medical options available to treat the depression. Turning to the illegal use of prescription medications is not a viable alternative. Additionally, there is no record of a suicide attempt in the Applicant’s service records. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s depression and chain-of-command recommendations did not warrant upgrading the Separation Authority’s decision to discharge the Applicant Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( Propriety/ Equity ) . The Applicant contends he was discharged for a crime that he had already been adequately punished for. Administrative discharge processing is a separate and distinct process from punitive proceedings such as court-martial. Furthermore, administrative discharge processing is administrative in nature and not considered a form of punishment. As such, the Applicant’s contention that he was punished twice for the same misconduct is erroneous. Based upon the evidence of record, the NDRB found no improprieties or inequities in the Applicant’s discharge processing. 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 | MD1101476

Original file (MD1101476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” After considering all the facts and circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s case, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be discharged from the Marine Corps with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct and Drug Abuse) with drug abuse being the primary basis. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201238

Original file (MD1201238.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00148

Original file (ND04-00148.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Bill”Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS): “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Condition to that of Honorable.The FSM served...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801649

Original file (MD0801649.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901400

Original file (ND0901400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Furthermore, being subjected to punishment at an NJP proceeding does not precluded a service member from being administratively processed for separation since administrative separations are not considered punitive in nature.Based on a review of the evidence of record and evidence presented by the Applicant, the Board determined there was sufficient evidence to support a administrative separation based on misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and that an upgrade to Honorable...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600332

Original file (ND0600332.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“-I would like for my RE-4 code and/or my narrative reason to be upgraded for eligibility to return to a branch of service.” Appeal denied 031105.031008: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct - pattern of misconduct and misconduct - commission of serious offense. The names, and votes of...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301872

Original file (MD1301872.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...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0310

Original file (FD2002-0310.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0310 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD _— a. Basis for Discharge: Respondent has received three Article 15s, all of them alcohol-related. Discharge is appropriate.
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2007-00013

Original file (FD2007-00013.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

Mn 20762-7002 Previous edition will be used AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-2007-00013 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. The records also indicated at the time applicant was being processed for discharge, he waived his right to an administrative discharge board with a conditional waiver for receipt of a general discharge. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: At the time of my separation, 1 had just finished...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021386

Original file (20120021386.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Item 15 (Final Approval) of a DD Form 261 (Report of Investigation LOD and Misconduct Status), dated 28 March 2012, shows the final approval authority determined the FSM was "NOT IN THE LINE OF DUTY DUE TO OWN MISCONDUCT (DEATH CASE)." She provides a memorandum, dated 22 June 2012, from the Director, Casualty and Mortuary Affairs Operations Center, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY that states this office made an LOD...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200706

Similar Decisions