Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400263

Original file (MD1400263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20131126

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)       20040112 - 20040321     Active:          20040322 - 20070715

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070716     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 9 Months
Date of Discharge: 20091211      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 71
MOS: 7041
Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):      (3) (4) MM CoC (2) LoA (2)

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:             SCM:             SPCM:             CC:

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20091025 :       Charges: DUI, reckless driving, vehicular assault , and leaving the scene of an accident

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20050606 :       For your assignment to the Marine Corps Body Composition Program (BCP)

- 2005 1206 :       For your extension on the Ma rine Corps BCP

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Block 2 , Department, Component, and Branch, should read: “ USMC-11 ”
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 040322 UNTIL 070715 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps , MMSB-13, 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 P1900.16 F ), 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ , Article 111 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to receive service benefits .
2.       The Applicant contends he was initially offered an immediate discharge with a General characterization with his civilian lawyer but wa s subsequently, and without the assistance of counsel, presented administrative separation proceedings paperwork notifying him of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c haracterization .
3.       The Applicant contends his in-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade .

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0612          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 in his current enlistment included 6105 counseling warnings and a civil arrest for driving under the influence, reckless driving, vehicular assault, and leaving the scene of an accident. 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 right to consult with a qualified counsel but waived his rights to submit a written statement and request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to receive service 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. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was initially offered an immediate discharge with a General characterization with his civilian lawyer but wa s subsequently, and without the assistance of counsel, presented administrative separation proceedings paperwork notifying him of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c haracterization . The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was wrongfully discharged. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. In the Applicant’s case, the record of evidence shows he was notified using the Administrative Board Procedure. In his notification, he was clearly notified that he could ultimately receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge characterization and that his Commanding Officer was recommending a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge characterization. The Applicant exercised his right to counsel but waived his rights to an administrative board and to provide a written statement to the Separation Authority ( Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruit Depot/Eastern Recruiting Region ) . The commanding officer’s recommendation for separation is just that, a recommendation. The Separation Authority determines whether the allegations in the notification of the basis for separation are substantiated by the evidence. There is no provisional guarantee that a Marine will receive anything that a local commanding officer recommends. The NDRB determined he received full due process and all applicable rights. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his in-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade. The Applicant received an Honorable characterization of service for his first enlistment from March 2004 to July 2007. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his second enlistment, he was arrested for DUI, reckless driving, vehicular assault, and leaving the scene of an accident . In accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, servicemembers may be separated based on the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the commanding officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial for the same or closely related offense. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction, however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence, such as an arrest. The statements and documents provided by the Applicant do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case. The Applicant was provided the opportunity to present his case before an administrative board, but he waived that right, thus accepting the discharge recommended in the letter of notification.

The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. The characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record of service in his second enlistment , the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301370

Original file (MD1301370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service record documents completion of two deployments to Iraq from February 2003 to May 2003 and from July 2004 to February 2005, conducting combat operations 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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence,...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101103

Original file (ND1101103.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 | 2015_Marine | MD1401495

Original file (MD1401495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

20130221: Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing forwarded Report of Misconduct to the Commandant of the Marine Corps recommending the Applicant’s administrative separation as a probationary officer via notification procedures. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500014

Original file (MD1500014.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 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301728

Original file (MD1301728.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19950513 - 19951126Active: 19951127 - 20010222 HON USMC 20010223 - 20040623 HON USMC 20040624 - 20080308 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080309Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20090914Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)05 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:52MOS: 0659Fitness Reports:...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201719

Original file (ND1201719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand 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 | 2010_Marine | MD1000548

Original file (MD1000548.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 ” Additional Reviews :...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201173

Original file (MD1201173.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300003

Original file (ND1300003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The Applicant contends his discharge was too harsh.During the Applicant’s four years of service, he was found guilty at three NJPs for serious offenses and received a retention warning after his first NJP that warned that he could be discharged if he committed further misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900212

Original file (MD0900212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee clemency will be granted, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct justifies clemency. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Bad Conduct Discharge”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided, clemency...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400263

Similar Decisions