Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201407

Original file (MD1201407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120612

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)       19991027 - 20000821     Active:          20000822 - 20040329
                                             20040330 - 20070823

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070824     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20100806      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 14 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
MOS: 0629
Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (3) Pistol (2) (6) (3)

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:    SCM:             SPCM: CC:    Retention Warning Counseling :

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 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and R etirement 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)(b), 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 the punishment was disproportionate to the misconduct.
2 .       The Applicant contends his command ignored his pleas for assistance to deal with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and depression.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0411          Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD, in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist. In accordance with section 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution. The Applicant’s service record documents completion of three d eployment s to t he Al-Anbar Province of Iraq from July 2005 to March 2006, December 2006 to March 2007, and March 2008 to September 2008 in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM.

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 his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included no adjudicated misconduct during his current enlistment but did reflect a charge sheet referring a violation of Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) to a Special Court - Martial. The Applicant subsequently requested administrative separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT), and his command accepted this request. Per regulations, to ob tain approval for a SILT request, service members must have been afforded the opportunity to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. They must also fully understand the elements of the offense(s) for which they were charged, and they must admit their guilt. They further certify a complete understanding of the negative consequences of their actions and that characterization of service could be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, which might deprive them of virtually all veterans benefits based upon their current enlistment.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the punishment was disproportionate to the misconduct. 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. As a Drill Instructor at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, refusing to train is a serious offense that had to be dealt with swiftly and strongly. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense, that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a n Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his command ignored his pleas for assistance to deal with PTSD and depression. In determining a discharge characterization of service, the Applicant’s conduct forms the primary basis for consideration. The Applicant’s in-service conduct included one violation of Article 92 for his refusal to train; this was a willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract honorably. However, the records also reveal that the Applicant suffered from depression and the effects of combat stress from his three deployments to Iraq and appropriately sought out assistance using proper channels. Despite numerous attempts to alert his chain of command to the negative effects of his mental health, his pleas went unanswered. After several requests for help, the Applicant finally refused to train and had charges

referred to a Special Court-Martial. While the NDRB does not excuse his ultimate decision to refuse to train, the Board did determine his proper actions in seeking assistance for his deteriorating mental health does mitigate his misconduct . By a vote of 3-2 (three votes to General, two votes to Honorable) , the NDRB found the awarded characterization of service was inequitable and that relief in the form of an upgrade in the characterization of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions) is warranted. Relief granted.

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 T herefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but 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 | MD1100087

Original file (MD1100087.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” Subsequent to his relief for cause from recruiting duties, the Applicant submitted a request to the Court-Martial Convening Authority requesting administrative separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT), in exchange for his plea of guilty to one or more of the offenses for which he was charged.After review of the Applicant’s record of service and the circumstances surrounding the case, the Convening Authority approved the Applicant’s SILT request and directed that he be separated...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001821

Original file (MD1001821.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 governmental affairs unless there is...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400879

Original file (ND1400879.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant wants to re-enlist.2. ” 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. 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002340

Original file (ND1002340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.The Applicant’s record of...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300731

Original file (ND1300731.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100669

Original file (ND1100669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20071217 - 20080506Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080507Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090126Highest Rank/Rate:AOANLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 20 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 98EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(1)Behavior:3.0(1)OTA: 3.00Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1102111

Original file (ND1102111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19950213 - 19950529Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19950530Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19961115Highest Rank/Rate: ET3Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 16 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 99EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100852

Original file (MD1100852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19950712 - 19951023Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19951024Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:19981211Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)18 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:87MOS: 0151Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401015

Original file (ND1401015.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19980612 - 19980824Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19980825Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20021101Highest Rank/Rate: ACANLength of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 08 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 55EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200711

Original file (MD1200711.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20070816 - 20071014Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20071015Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20100820Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)06 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:74MOS: 1731Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201407

Similar Decisions