Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400308

Original file (MD1400308.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20131217

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)       20040629 - 20050523     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050524     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20090827      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
MOS: 3531
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (2) (2)

Periods of UA :

NJP:

- 20061108 :       Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 3 s pecifications)
         Specification 1: On or about 0400, 20061104, did violate a lawful order issue d by the Commanding Officer, in which SNM failed to sign out of respectful barracks liberty log book.
         Specification 2: On or about 0400, 20061104, SNM violated MCBJO 1600.1c w/ch 3 by wrongfully consuming alcohol under the legal drinking age.
         Specification 3: On or about 0400, 20061104, did violate MCBO 1050.6 by wrongfully remaining off base after 2400 with a red liberty card.
         Article (Resistance, breach of arrest, and escape ; o n or about 0400 on 061104, SNM did resist being apprehended by Military Police, a person authorized to apprehend the accused )
         Article ( Provoking speeches or gestures; o n or about 0400 on 061104, used reproachful words and gestures toward Military Police members )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20071007 :      Article ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer )
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     CC:

SPCM:

- 20080416 :       Art icle (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances , 2 s pecifications)
         Specification 1: While on active duty, d id at an unknown location, between 20071211 and 20080111, wrongfully use marijuana, a controlled substance.
         Specification 2: While on active duty, did at an unknown location between on or about 20080221 and 20080321, wrongfully use marijuana, a controlled substance.
         Sentence : BCD

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20061108 :       For Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), Article 95 ( Resistance, breach of arrest, and escape ), and Article 11 7 ( Provoking speeches or gestures )

- 20071011 :       For Article 91( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)

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 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 clemency to receive service benefits and P ost-Traumatic Stress Disorder (P TSD ) compensation .
2.       The Applicant contends youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct , and he completed 3/4 of his contractual obligation .

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0227          Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD, in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist. In accordance with section 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution. The Applicant’s service record documents completion of a deployment to Iraq in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM 05-07.

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 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 record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 4 specifications), Article 95 ( Resistance, breach of arrest, and escape ), and Article 117 ( Provoking speeches or gestures ) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 112a ( Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances , 2 specific ation s). The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, and acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 27 June 2004 . Based on the Applicant ’ s guilty pleas as a result of his pre-trial agreement of 03 April 2008 , he was convicted, confined , and separated with a punitive Bad Conduct Discharge. The Applicant fully exercised his rights to request clemency and post-trial review s of his case. No assignments of error or clemency were granted in the review process.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to receive service benefits and PTSD compensation . 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 youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct , and he completed 3/4 of his contractual obligation . While the Applicant may feel his youth and immaturity were the underlying causes of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The NDRB recognizes that many of our servicemembers are young at the time they enlist for service, however, most still manage to serve honorably. While some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB does not view a member’s claim of immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct . Further, while the Applicant served 3/4 of his enlistment, during that time he received two retention warnings, was found guilty at two NJPs for multiple UCMJ offenses, and was convicted at a Special Court-Martial for two violations of UCMJ Article 112a.

With respect to his PTSD claim, t he NDRB requested all records of medical treatment, both active duty and post-service, from the VA. The records received from the VA failed to document any request for evaluation, any diagnosis, or any findings of PTSD or other mental health concerns. Moreover, the Applicant did not provide any evidence of a diagnosis of PTSD from any other private mental health treatment provider to document his claim. The NDRB found no evidence in the record of any indications of, or diagnosis for, PTSD. Additionally, there is no evidence in either the Applicant’s service record, or the documentation he provided, that demonstrated any problems or symptoms manifesting during his enlistment from his service in Iraq. Furthermore, the Applicant’s record does not document any attempts to seek help for any combat stress-related symptoms while in service. Lacking any evidence of PTSD, the NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200469

Original file (MD1200469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Accordingly, relief as requested is denied.Issue 3: (Decisional Issue) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.The Applicant contends that his misconduct of record was the result of stress from depression and anxiety related to his combat service.The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300995

Original file (ND1300995.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Though his case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1), the NDRB included a Navy psychiatrist on the personal hearing board as a result of the MST PTSD.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, to...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101739

Original file (MD1101739.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

These actions established a pattern of misconduct that warranted consideration for administrative separation. As such, the NDRB determined that an upgrade in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge is not appropriate and is not 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301216

Original file (MD1301216.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400475

Original file (ND1400475.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. Relief denied.Summary:...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000080

Original file (MD1000080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and medical record entries, and discharge process, the NDRB determined 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001018

Original file (ND1001018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00892

Original file (MD03-00892.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 010612: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO’s NJP dated 010507.010614: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: 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).A characterization of service of under other than honorable...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401786

Original file (MD1401786.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave; 3 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct towards warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 1 specification) Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation; 1 specification), Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures, 1 specifaction), and Article 128 (Assault, 3 specifications). Summary: After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300837

Original file (ND1300837.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400308

Similar Decisions