Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400801

Original file (MD1400801.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20140313

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)       20010330 - 20011021     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011022     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060920      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 59
MOS: 2146
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):      Rifle

NJP:

- 20040317 :       Article (Absence without leave, 0730, 20040301-1800, 20040308, 7 days)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     CC:

SPCM:

- 20051019 :       Art icle (Absence without leave, 20040614-2005083 0 , 44 3 days)
         Sentence : 90 days ( 20050902-20051027, 56 days)

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20040127 :       For his recent unauthorized absence from his appointed place of duty, BN Maintenance, H&S Co, 1st Tank Bn, 1MarDiv, MCAGCC on 20040126 from 0530-1700. SNM knew Friday, 20040123 that he was to report to the platoon PT at 0530 on Monday 20040126. Instead of calling anyone in his chain of command , SNM called a fellow LCpl. SNM had the ability to contact the Mar ines in his chain of command , bu t SNM made a conscious dec ision not to contact anyone in his chain of command.

- 20040312 :       For the following deficiencies: Pattern of misconduct : SNM failure to obey orders on three separate occasions.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ (56) 20050902-20051027, (44 3 ) 20040614-20050830, ( 7 ) 20040301-20040308 ”

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 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 contends P ost- T raumatic S tress D isorder (PTSD) mitigates his misconduct .

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0508 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 co mpletion of a deployment during the invasion of Iraq from Jan uary to September 200 3 , 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. 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 86 ( Absence without leave , 7 days ) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 443 days ). Based on the Applicant's conviction and sentence at a S pecial C ourt- M artial, he was confined and separated with a Bad Conduct Discharge. The Navy and Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the Applicant’s S pecial Court-Martial decision and ordered the Bad Conduct Discharge to be executed.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends PTSD m itigat es his misconduct. The NDRB requested all records of medical treatment, both active duty and post-service, from the Department of Veterans Affairs (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 while in service. Additionally, the Applicant’s record does not document any attempts to seek help for any combat stress-related symptoms while in service to include during his court-martial, confinement, and separation physical. The Applicant, however, did submit significant post-service diagnoses and treatment for PTSD that he contends relates to his tour in Iraq. The records also show post-service diagnoses for Major Depressive Disorder, Depression, Schizoaffective Disorder, poly-substance abuse, alcohol abuse, and inhalant abuse. Nowhere in the record, however, does it say that the Applicant was not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. In fact, PTSD was specifically discussed and considered as a possible mitigating circumstance before his conviction at a Special Court-Martial . After a complete review of the Applicant’s service records , post-service medical records , and statements from the Applicant and his family, the NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate his misconduct and clemency is not 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

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700126

Original file (ND0700126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): due to PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT AND COMMISION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE (20040713) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, NAVAL AIR FORCE, U.S. PACIFIC FLEET (20040804)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20040804 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400891

Original file (ND1400891.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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400928

Original file (ND1400928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of misconduct and counselling warnings clearly meets the Navy’s standard for administrative separation for reason of a pattern of misconduct in accordance with regulations. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that PTSD was the cause of his pattern of misconduct.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries,...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500706

Original file (ND1500706.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700346

Original file (ND0700346.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined that an upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate and also determined that the narrative reason was appropriate.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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500230

Original file (MD1500230.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, 1 specification), Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer, 1 specification), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 1 specification), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 1 specification), Article 113 (Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout, 2...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500601

Original file (MD1500601.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 15April 2005. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902366

Original file (ND0902366.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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301441

Original file (MD1301441.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.
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101407

Original file (MD1101407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the facts known at the time of the misconduct, the NDRB determined that the deliberate and repetitive violations of the UCMJ warranted punitive action vice administrative processing; as such, the court-martial and resultant Bad Conduct Discharge was appropriate and warranted. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record entries, Medical Record documentation, post service veterans treatment records, and the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400801

Similar Decisions