Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400378

Original file (MD1400378.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20131224

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)       20080821 - 20080901     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080902     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20120524      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 23 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 57
MOS: 3531
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

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

Periods of CONF :

NJP:

- 20110714 :       Article (Absence without leave ; failed to go at the time prescribed to physical training at 0545, 15 June 2011)
         Article ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ; on or about 28 June 2011 was disrespectful in language toward a noncommissioned officer )
         Awarded: Suspended: (Vacated on 20110715)

- 20111026 :      Article (Absence without leave , 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failed to go at the prescribed time to restriction check in at 1500, 20110821.
         Specification 2: Failed to go at the prescribed time to restriction check in at 1800, 20110821.
         Specification 3 : Failed to go at the prescribed time to restriction check in at 0645, 20110831.
         Article ( Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel ; on or about 06 September 2011, physically control a vehicle in a reckless manner and failed to obey the speed limit by traveling 94 mph in a 70 mph zone )
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20091026 :       For your violation of Articles 86 of the UCMJ; unauthorized absence. On 20091026 at approximately 0730, I was supposed to report to Motor Vehicle Incidental Drivers School to conduct the MRAP driver course.

- 20110510 :       For lack of judgment, discipline, and responsibility , in which you were in violation of Article 86, unauthorized absence. Specifically, on 20110508 Sunday, you failed to show up at barracks duty.

- 20110613 :       For lack of judgment, discipline, and responsibility , in which you were in violation of Article 86, unauthorized absence. Specifically, on 20110613 Monday, your appointed place of duty was FC413 at 0545. Y ou failed to show up for accountability as well as FC120 formation at 0800.

- 20110714 :       For your violation of Article 86x2 and 91.

- 20111026 :       For your violation of Articles 86x3 and 111.

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 he had mental health issues while in service that mitigate his misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0702 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 standards 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, 4 specifications ), Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer), and Article 111 ( Drunk or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel). 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 rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative board . The a dministrative b oard determined, by majority vote, that the preponderance of evidence prove d all acts or omissi ons alleged in the notification and recommended that the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service , without suspension. The Separation Authority approved the board’s findings, and the Applicant was discharged for a Pattern of Misconduct.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he had mental health issues while in service that mitigate his misconduct. The Applicant stated on his DD Form 293 that he was not treated for mental health problems while on active duty , but he has been receiving treatment and special compensation for mental health issues since his separation from the Marine Corps. 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. The NDRB did not find any reference to any medical diagnosis in the Applicant’s service record to support his claim, and the Applicant did not provide any documentary evidence of a medical diagnosis by competent medical authorities to support his claim. Though the Applicant may feel that his mental condition was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record reflects willful misconduct that demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. 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 | MD1200887

Original file (MD1200887.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.
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000221

Original file (ND1000221.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. Summary: After a thorough...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300194

Original file (MD1300194.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

However, the record clearly shows the Applicant’s PTSD was taken into proper consideration throughout the separation process, and it was determined that the Applicant’s PTSD did not completely mitigate the Applicant’s severe and repetitive misconduct. The Applicant, as a combat veteran, is encouraged to contact his local VA affairs representative for more information and may request a review of service and determination of benefits from the VA. Alternately, he may call 1-877-222-8387 or...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900593

Original file (MD0900593.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200724

Original file (ND1200724.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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500738

Original file (ND1500738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of 3-0, the administrative separation board found that a preponderance of the evidence supports a finding of guilty and the Applicant was subsequently discharged on 20141219. : (Decisional) () . While there is evidence in the record documenting that the Applicant was receiving treatment for depression, there is no evidence supporting the notion that he was not responsible for his misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300650

Original file (MD1300650.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...
NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00229

Original file (ND01-00229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600 A personal appearance hearing discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010420. After a thorough review of the testimony, records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The counsel for the applicant presented six issues for the Board’s...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401322

Original file (ND1401322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends that youth and immaturity were the underlying cause for his discharge from the Navy.2. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401684

Original file (ND1401684.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 UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400378

Similar Decisions