Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301257

Original file (MD1301257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20130515

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)       20020928 - 20021111     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021112     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20070120      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 09 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
MOS: 0621
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA: NONE

NJP:

- 20031029 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20040823 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:              CC:               Retention Warning Counseling:

SPCM:

- 20050816 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (False official statements , intended to deceive a commissioned officer )
         Article (Assault , pushing a commissioned officer against the wall )
         Sentence : 6 months (20050816-20060113, 148 days)

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 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL, 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 IV, Para 403m(7)(a), 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 seeks an upgrade to qualify for G.I. Bill benefits.
2.       The Applicant contends he was only involved in one instance of misconduct during his enlistment, and his Proficiency and Conduct marks were high before the misconduct.
3. The Applicant contends his post - service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 1204          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 NDRB 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service included nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 2 specifications) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and one for of the UCMJ: Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation ), Article 107 ( False official statements, intended to deceive a commissioned officer ), and Article 128 ( Assault, pushing a commissioned officer against the wall ). The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 16 August 2005 . A qualified legal defense counsel represented the Applicant throughout the trial by Special Court-Martial process. Given the facts of the case, the Special Court-Martial awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge, forfeiture of $ 400 pay per month for 6 months, confinement for a period of 6 months , and reduction in rank to E-1 . The C onvening A uthority ap proved the sentence as adjudged . The case was submitted for review to the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals without assignments of error , a nd the findings wer e affirmed on 18 January 2007 .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for G.I. Bill benefits. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was only involved in one instance of misconduct during his enlistment, and his Proficiency and Conduct marks were high before the misconduct. During the Applicant’s 4 years and 2 months of service, he was found guilty of several serious offenses at two NJPs and was found guilty at a Special Court-Martial of three UCMJ violations. Even after taking into consideration his average Proficiency and Conduct marks, the NDRB determined his misconduct was not isolated, and clemency is not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post - service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined clemency was not warranted. Clemency 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901517

Original file (ND0901517.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiates or relates directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). Additionally, upon receipt of the Applicant's DD Form 293, the NDRB mails an acceptance letter that includes Information Concerning Review Procedures , which discusses the submission of additional documents in paragraph 3,...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400497

Original file (MD1400497.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100610

Original file (ND1100610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for the G. I. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902554

Original file (MD0902554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency.The NDRB conducted a detailed review of the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the applicant was afforded all his rights and to determine if clemency, under the basis of equity, was warranted.The NDRB...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400386

Original file (MD1400386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501092

Original file (MD1501092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301448

Original file (MD1301448.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19981219 - 19990103Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19990104Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20040113Highest Rank:Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s)10 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:43MOS: 0341Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):/Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000343

Original file (MD1000343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After reviewing the Applicant's proficiency and conduct markings, the NDRB located an erroneous set of marks, which ultimately became the difference of the Applicant receiving the correct characterization of service. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000694

Original file (MD1000694.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20001130 - 20010708Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010709Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20050817Highest Rank: Length of Service: Years Months0 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:36MOS: 0151Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):(14)/(14)Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201317

Original file (MD1201317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as a 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301257

Similar Decisions