Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201573

Original file (MD1201573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120716

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)       20051130 - 20051227     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20051228     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years M onth
Date of Discharge: 20110511      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 14 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 62
MOS: 6113
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2) LoA (3) MM ACM MUC NATO (ISAF) Afghanistan AFSM

Periods of UA / CONF :
I n Hands of Civil Authorities : 20101015 - 20110214, 123 days

NJP:             SCM:             SPCM:             CC:

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20101015 :       Charges: S econd Degree Rape [Extracted from Commanding Officer's letter dated 20101112]

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20100803 :       For lack of judgment in that you were involved in an alcohol - related incident on 20100801 resulting in an investigation concern ing a violation of Article 120

- 20101112 :       For C ommission of a Serious Offense

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 :

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends his discharge was not approved by the appropriate Sepa rati on Authority since his administrative separation board did not find that the preponderance of the evidence prove d any of the acts or omissions alleged in the notification, and the board recommended to retain him.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0502 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 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, but no misconduct resulting in non-judicial punishment or court-martial. However, the record reflects the Applicant was arrested by civilian authorities for sec ond degree rape and spent 123 days in the hands of civil authorities . Ba sed on th is commission of a serious offense (violation of Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 86, Unauthorized absence greater than 30 days), 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 submit a written statement, but exercised his right to appear before an administrative board . The Applicant appeared before an administrative separation board on 14 December 2010 , who determined by a majority vote that the preponderance of the evidence d id not prove any of the acts or omissions alleged in the notification , and by a majority vote , the board recommend ed the Applicant be retained in the Marine Corps. The Applicant’s c ommanding o fficer concurred with the board’s findings, but the Commanding Officer, Marine Aircraft Group 29 and Commanding General, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing did not and recommended he be discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service for Misconduct (Serious Offense). There was nothing in the Applicant’s record concerning the decision of the Separation Authority (Deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps, Manpower and Reserve Affairs). However, the Applicant reached the end of his active obligated service and was separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization for Completion of Required Active Service.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was not approved by the appropriate Separation Authority since his administrative separation board did not find that the preponderance of the evidence proved any of the acts or omissions alleged in the notification, and the board recommended to retain him. The NDRB agrees with the Applicant that his discharge for Misconduct (Serious Offense) was never authorized by the Separation Authority. However, the Applicant was not discharged for Misconduct (Serious Offense) but was allowed to continue his service until the end of his active obligated service. 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 military personnel. Therefore, characterization of service will be Honorable for Marines with average Proficiency marks of 3.0 or higher and average Conduct marks of 4.0 or higher. The Applicant completed his obligated service and his overall marks for P roficiency and C onduct were 4.3 and 4. 4 , respectively. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety in the discharge action but did discern an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service. The NDRB voted unanimously to upgrade the characterization of service to Honorable. 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 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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION .

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 .

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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200692

Original file (ND1200692.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19991118 - 19991212Active: 19991213 - 20031009 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20031010Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20101112Highest Rank/Rate:OS2Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 02 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 44EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.3(3)Behavior:3.3(3)OTA: 3.38Awards and Decorations (per...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200811

Original file (ND1200811.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, not receiving additional help does not excuse or mitigate his subsequent alcohol-related misconduct. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400656

Original file (ND1400656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201522

Original file (ND1201522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks to reenlist and have his RE-code changed.2. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101926

Original file (MD1101926.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident, and the Marine Corps retained him for a second tour in Iraq.When a servicemember reaches the end of active obligated service, the characterization of service depends solely on average Proficiency and Conduct markings. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301376

Original file (MD1301376.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 of...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300851

Original file (ND1300851.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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101047

Original file (ND1101047.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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100108

Original file (MD1100108.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 6419, SEPARATION IN...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100282

Original file (MD1100282.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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201573

Similar Decisions