Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501031

Original file (MD1501031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-LCpl, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20150429
Characterization of Service Received: (per DD 214) UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS

Narrative Reason for Discharge: (corrected) MISCONDUCT
Reenlistment Code: RE-4

Authority for Discharge: (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6 [COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE]

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
         Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USMCR (DEP)      19990519 - 19990524 COG         Active: USMC 19990525 - 20031014 HON
                           Active: USMC 20031015 - 20080610 HON
                           Active: USMC 20080611 - 20120625 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20120626    Age at Enlistment: 33
Period of Enlistment: 4 Years 2 Months
Date of Discharge: 20130426     Highest Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Length of Service: 00 Year(s) 10 Month(s) 01 Day(s)
Education Level: 12     AFQT: 64
MOS: 2862
Fitness Reports: AVAILABLE

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle SS Pistol SS NMCAM NUC (4) GCM (4) NDSM GWOTEM GWOTSM SSDR (2) MCRR CoC

Periods of UA/CONF: NONE

NJP: NONE

SCM: 1

- 20130118:      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) 2 specifications:
         Specification 1: Wrongfully bring his personal firearm into his workspace onboard 29 Palms.
         Specification 2: Violated California Penal Code Section 25850 by wrongfully transporting his personal weapon without locking it in a lockable container, in his POV.
         Article 128 (Assault; O/A 20 December 2012, SNM pointed an unloaded firearm at a coworker. )
         Sentence: RIR E-5 FOP

SPCM: NONE       CC: NONE

Retention Warning Counseling: 1

- 20130125:      For your Summary Court Martial held on 20130118 for violation of Article(s) 92 x 2 and 128 to wit you were found guilty.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Block 18, Remarks, should contain the statement: “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 990525 UNTIL 120625”
         Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: “MISCONDUCT”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps 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:                  Other Documentation:
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:          From/To Representation:          From/To Congress member:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), 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 that he was improperly charged at court martial and reduced in rank.

Decision

Date: 20150805 DOCUMENTARY REVIEW Location: Washington D.C. Representation: NONE

By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS .
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain MISCONDUCT .

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 evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included one 6105 counseling warnings and one summary court-martial (SCM) for violations of the UCMJ: Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 128 (Assault). When notified of administrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure, the Applicant exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, and waived his rights to submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

Issue 1: (Decisional) (Propriety) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends that he was improperly charged at court martial and reduced in rank. The Applicant cites improprieties based on a legal review by Legal Services Support Team dated 26 April 2013. The legal review cites minor irregularities in the wording of one of the Article 92 specifications, and notes that a document dated 22 January 2013 indicated that the Applicant might have been reduced in rank to Sergeant three days prematurely. The memorandum clearly stated that the discrepancies were minor and only provided to the command for information in the preparation of future cases. Upon review, the NDRB found that the disciplinary actions based on Article 92 specifications were well within the maximum punishments established in the UCMJ and proper as issued. Regarding the possible premature reduction in rate from Staff Sergeant to Sergeant, it is likely that the document was staffed based on the sentencing from the court martial and not expected to be finalized until after the Commanding Officer approved the sentence. The Applicant did not provide any evidence that he was not allowed to wear the uniform of Staff Sergeant or was deprived of any pay or benefits during the three days in question. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his 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 , or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500629

Original file (MD1500629.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501206

Original file (MD1501206.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901312

Original file (MD0901312.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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500684

Original file (MD1500684.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. Paragraph 6210,...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901279

Original file (MD0901279.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 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 hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900195

Original file (MD0900195.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant did not specific any issues for the NDRB to review. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801906

Original file (MD0801906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate for the numerous violations the Applicant committed and an upgrade based on back pain as a mitigating factor would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800821

Original file (MD0800821.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : (Equity) either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. Based on this evidence, an upgrade or change in the characterization of service by the Board is unwarranted.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record, Discharge Process and...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500008

Original file (MD1500008.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000277

Original file (MD1000277.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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501031

Similar Decisions