Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201501

Original file (MD1201501.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120703

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to: CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20031220 - 20040829     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040830     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060329      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 84
MOS: 3381
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20050218 :      Article (Absence without leave, 20050115 - 20050214, 30 days)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20050706 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , o n 20050704 didn’t report for duty)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20051221 :      Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: On or about 20051122, reported to work late, thus missing headquarters building clean up
         Specification 2: On or about 20051122, failed to report to CPAC to begin checking out for the Fleet Assistance Program. PFC absen ted herself without notifying the command to see her physician.
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - Disobeying a direct order directing her to report to CPAC to begin Fleet Assistance Program check-out )
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20060309 :      Charges: DUI [Extracted from R etention W arning dated 20060314]

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20050218 :      For violation of Article 86 (Unauthorized a bsence from 20050115 to 20050214).

- 20050519 :      For violation of Article 92, Failure to obey an order or regulation. You failed to obey an order or regulation when you operated a vehicle without a valid driver’s license.

- 20050519 :       For your violation of Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence).

- 20051221 :      For Borderline Personality Disorder. Per MCO P1900.16F, par 6203, a diagnosis of a Personality Disorder without non-medical evidence does not constitute grounds for discharge and finds you fit for full duty.

- 20060314 :      For DUI, .13% BAC, and pending civil legal action with a court date of 20060420.

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:                  Other Documentation:
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:          From/To Representation:          From/To Congress member:

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 seeks an upgrade to qualify for Department of Veterans Affairs ( VA ) medical benefits.
2.       The Applicant contends her command wrongly discharged her for misconduct based on “behavioral problems” and should have discharged her according to a psychologist’s recommendation for an expeditious separation in September 2005. The Applicant also contends her discharge is inequitable, because her command ignored her mental health issues and instead punished her for misconduct that led to an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.
3 .       The Applicant contends her post - service accomplishments are worthy of consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0418          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 86 ( Absence without leave, 4 specifications) and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications) , and one civilian arrest f or DUI. 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 and request an administrative board, but exercised her right to s ubmit a written statement .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for VA medical 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 re-characterization 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her command wrongly discharged her for misconduct based on “behavioral problems” and should have discharged her according to a psychologist’s recommendation for an expeditious separation in September 2005. The Applicant also contends her discharge is inequitable, because her command ignored her mental health issues and instead punished her for misconduct that led to an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. The Applicant’s command did not discharge her for “behavioral problems.” Rather, they discharged her for a Pattern of Misconduct. There is nothing in her service or medical records, nor did the Applicant provide any evidence, to show that she was not responsible for her actions or should not be held accountable for her misconduct. Her records do reveal frequent visits to mental health professionals and ongoing treatment for the many mental health issues that she failed to disclose to her recruiter and likely would have prevented her entry into the Marine Corps. Despite receiving ongoing mental health treatment while in service, the Applicant continued to commit misconduct and was appropriately punished. The psychologist’s recommendation in September 2005 to expeditiously separate her is just that, a recommendation. Her command chose to retain her in service, even though she already met the requirements for separation due to a Pattern of Misconduct by September 2005, and she continued to commit misconduct. Department of Defense disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons, such as medically related separation. After a complete review of the records and the Applicant’s statement, the NDRB determined her discharge was proper and equitable . Relief denied.

Issue 3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her post - service accomplishments are worthy of consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a personal statement, a criminal background check, and character references. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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. The Board determined the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. 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

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101668

Original file (ND1101668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: NONE 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801009

Original file (ND0801009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700895

Original file (ND0700895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20020731 - 20030709 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030710Years Contracted:4Date of Discharge:20060209Length of Service: 02 Yrs 07Mths00 DysLost Time:Days UA unable to determineEducation Level: 12Age at...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900701

Original file (ND0900701.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001915

Original file (MD1001915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902169

Original file (MD0902169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. He was twice arrested for underage possession of alcohol (received an enlistment waiver) and continued heavy regular use of alcohol following enlistment. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101616

Original file (MD1101616.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Accordingly, the NDRB found that the narrative reason shall change to Secretarial Authority. Relief not warranted for the character of service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and medical and record entries, the Board found the discharge was improper. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300575

Original file (ND1300575.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: NONE Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Appointment: 20051221Age: 27Years Contracted: Indefinite Date of Discharge: 20110430 Highest Rank: LIEUTENANTLength of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 10 Day(s) Education Level: Officer’s Fitness reports: AvailableAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF: NJP:- 20100526: Article (Failure to obey order or...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600006

Original file (ND0600006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Thanks for your time and consideration,M_ L. G_(Applicant)” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s letter to “Separation Authority”, dtd January 21, 2005 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000753

Original file (ND1000753.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201501

Similar Decisions