Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300097

Original file (MD1300097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20121016

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)       20020920 - 20030817     Active:          20030818 - 20061109

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20061110     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20100514      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 05 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 96
MOS: 3043
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2) LoA(2) CoA (2) MM

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20080311 :       Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 PT on 20080229
         Specification 2: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 PT on 20080305
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20081117 :      Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 formation on 20081027
         Specification 2: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 formation on 20081028
         Awarded: Suspended: 1 MONTH

- 20081223 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Wrongfully bringing a civilian female into the barracks without signing her into the log book and keeping her in his room past visiting hours.
         Specification 2: Violate restriction and EPD order by having a visitor in his room
         Article 134 (General A rticle - breaking restriction)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20080311 :       For failing to go to appointed place of duty, 2 specifications. More specifically, on 20080229 and 20080305, failed to go to PT at 0600.

- 20080807 :       For failure to go to appointed place of duty, in that SNM without authority did, repeatedly fail to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty, to wit: morning muster.

- 20091005 :       For failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on diverse occasions.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 030818 UNTIL 061109 ”
         “ ”

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 his discharge wa s based on incidents that were caused by sleep apnea, which was diagnosed before his discharge.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0724 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 86 ( Absence without leave, four specifications) , Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, two specifications) , and Article 134 ( General A rticle, breaking restriction). Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board . By a vote of 3-0, the administrative board determined the preponderance of the evidence prove d all acts or omissions alleged in the notification and recommended the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps Under Other Than Honorable Conditions and that his separation not be suspended. The Separation Authority, however, suspended the separation for 12 months. Due to further misconduct, the S eparati on A uthority vacated the Applicant’s suspended separation on 06 May 2010.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge wa s based on incidents that were caused by sleep apnea, which was diagnosed before his discharge. When reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. However, the NDRB does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition or diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to excuse the Applicant’s misconduct. There is nothing in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any evidence, that his sleep apnea mitigate d or excuse d his misconduct. There is nothing in the record to show that he was not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. 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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400203

Original file (MD1400203.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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101081

Original file (MD1101081.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 Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant could have...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500177

Original file (ND1500177.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500426

Original file (MD1500426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings; for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; 2 specifications), and Article 107 (False official statements); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave; 3 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; 2 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902164

Original file (MD0902164.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Summary: After a thorough...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800977

Original file (MD0800977.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the post service documentation and statements provided by the Applicant and did not mitigate the in service misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902234

Original file (MD0902234.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. ” 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. ...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901315

Original file (MD0901315.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE.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 Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to...
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00015

Original file (MD00-00015.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

MD00-00015 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990930, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Charge III, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Did on or about 851214, having been placed on duly imposed restriction, without authority, break said restrictions. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500551

Original file (MD0500551.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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).Issue 1: The Applicant states that he has learned a valuable lesson from the experience during his time in the U.S. Marine Corps and infers that Aggravating factors noted by the Board included: o four formal counseling (Page 11) entries for deficiencies in performance and conduct; o three nonjudicial punishment...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300097

Similar Decisions