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

 ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00637

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050302.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant listed the Disabled American Veterans as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050727.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“To:  To Whom it may concern
From:  C_ A. S_ (Applicant) [SSN deleted]

I joined the military with plans to achieve goals I had set for myself, which were to gain professional experience through knowledge I could acquire in the service while serving my country and my family at the same time.  My motivations was the thought of myself one day being a sergeant or a staff sergeant and being in a better position in life as well as support my family.

My duties in the military was managing support equipment (SE) assets at the organizational and intermediate levels of maintenance and aviation wings as well as the usages of logistic management techniques, supply procedures, technical publications, and automated data processing equipment to conduct, reconcile and report SE asset inventories; acquire and dispose of SE assets; train subordinate SE managers and conduct liaison with support equipment controlling authorities.  I describe my performance as satisfaction to outstanding.

In basic training I showed my drill instructors that I was a reliable, responsible, and honest person and for that I was the Guide and the Series Guide.  I graduated basic training as a squad leader.  My accomplishments was the completion of Marine Combat Training, AAA driver improvement program, Marine Corps Institute courses, and the IMRL Asset managers course.  On June 1, 2000 I was promoted to Private First Class.  On October 1, 2001 I was promoted to Lance Corporal. (Encl (2A)).  While serving in the military I did a lot of training in my MOS/job to better my skills and knowledge which was signed off by my NCOIC Sgt. G_ W_ and other superiors in my chain of command. (Encl (2B)).  My training copies show that they all agreed that I knew the subject taught on that date which shows the effort and dedication I put into my job.  It also shows that I did my job and was always striving for more knowledge as a Marine and IMRL manager.

While serving in the military I was faced with many hardships that affected my focus which was reflected through my performance of daily duties.  One of my hardship situations was that my son, S_ K. W_, born on December 27, 2001 through a caesarian section, was diagnosed with a condition know as GERD at 4 months old, which stands for Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease. (Encl (3) & (4)).  This type of condition is a serious life threatening disease which makes it difficult for my son to hold down food.  He had an Apnea Monitor that needed to be attached to him when he’d sleep to monitor his heart rate and respiration.  S_ was also on two medications that helped to keep his food down.  These medications were called Regulan and Zantac which were constantly being refilled. (Encl (5) & (6)).  S_ has been rushed to the emergency due to GERD related incidents and hospitalized up to 5 days.  My social worker A_ L_ and my doctor, Dr. N_ B_ knew of the importance of me getting a humanitarian transfer so therefore they wrote a letter on my behalf to the Bureau of Naval Personnel. (Encl (7)).  The humanitarian transfer still was not granted by my chain of command because my chain of command looked at the my hardships as if I were trying to get out of deployment instead of seeing that I was a mother in need to better take care of my family.  I was a desperate and stressed mother.  My husband at the time, L_ W_, and I would alternate care to take care of my son which caused a lot of problems in the military as well.  I contacted congressman R_ A_ and told him everything that was going on and he also wrote a letter on my behalf to better explain the importance of me serving my family and getting the humanitarian transfer. (Encl (8)).  The other problem that I was facing was that my mother, L_ A.  S_, and sister, C_ L.  S_ who was 17 at the time was loosing their house and were on welfare. (Encl (9A) & (9B)).  My sister and mother did end up losing their home.  I did my best to help my mother by sending money home.  All these hardships happening to me, between 20yrs and 21 yrs of age, made it very difficult for me.  My mother did not work due to back problems and depression. (Encl (10)).  My sister, C_ was a full time student.  My older sister, L_ M.  S_, was hurt from an accident so she was unable to help the financial burden on my mother. (Encl (11)).  The reason for her recent financial problem was because my father, C_ S_ Jr., had deserted my mother and refused to pay child support.  He left my mother with bills that continued to increase in arrears and my mother had no way of clearing them, so in turn filed for Chapter 13. (Encl (12)).  The results of all of the above mentioned is that my mother lost her home and I am still California.  I was also, at the time, was having a very hard marriage with L_ W_ (Encl (13A).  We are now, as of January 2005, legally divorced and separated since August 2002. (Encl (13B).  I was denied leave when I requested to go to my uncle’s funeral and to my parents home to help my family. (Encl (14)).  From all the hardships that was going on with my family, my son, myself, and my relationship, I was perceived as weak by my chain of command therefore they would constantly give me page 11’s on the hardships that I was going through. (Encl (15)).  I rebutted some of them, but eventually I felt helpless and hopeless.

The procedures the Military used to give me a discharge started with sending me from VMFA-323 squadron to Mals-l1.  After spending 3 months there I was sent out of the military with no direction of what to do next.  I had to do my own research.  I seen the importance of me putting a package together with all my documents and for the first time I am sending this to the Secretary of the Naval Council.

I did not see a lawyer nor any other counsel.  I did not have a discharge hearing by a board of officers.

I was not separated because of alcoholism.

I did not request a discharge for the good of the service.

I was not informed about the affects of a less than honorable discharge.

I was told that after a period of 6 months that my discharge would be automatically be upgraded to a honorable discharge.

I believed that the discharge that I received was wrong because I had my doctor, Congressman, social worker, and all appropriate supporting documents telling my chain of command to give a humanitarian transfer and proving that I was not lying about my hardships. (Encl (7) & (8)).  The packet I submitted to the Commandant of the Marine Corps did not even get pass my squadron and Mals.  My chain of command seemed to just see me as a weak Marine.  All I wanted to do was get a humanitarian transfer so I can better serve my family and still serve my country while working as a Marine closer to my family.  After trying to get a humanitarian transfer, my chain of command looked at that as a weakness which was one of the reasons that caused me to get a lot of negative attention from my chain of command.

The effects of my discharge was that I couldn’t get a good job, even after serving 3yrs.  I was not entitled to any benefits so I could not get a home for my son, S_ and me.  I could not go to college which I was promised after joining the Military.  I developed severe asthma and eczema while in the military and I cannot get the proper treatment for these conditions because I cannot afford the medical costs of these conditions. (Encl (16)).

After having my discharge upgraded I will be able to get a good job, get a home, and have more affordable college therefore I can get my life back on track.  I will be able to get the benefits such as treatment for the conditions I developed while in the military.

Since being out of the military I’ve worked and maintained good relationships with jobs. (Encl 17)).  I am unemployed and have not found a job that requires the skills I learned while in the military. (Encl 18)).  I am a musician and I produce music for fun.  I am opening my own business in music production called C_’s Recording Studio. (Encl 19)).  Before joining the military I graduated High School. (Encl (20A)).  While in the military and after I got out of the military I did some college. (Encl (20B)).  As of January 2005, I am a full time student at Grossmont college. (Encl (20C)).  Active duty members that knew me and all the hardships I was going through, knew that I was sincerely trying to conform, but still had difficulty with my chain of command. (Encl (21)).  I have always been a good citizen and I will continue to serve my family and help others in my everyday life. (Encl (22)).

Thank you Sir or Ma’am”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (Disabled American Veterans):

2.  “Dear Chairperson:

After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in a request for a discharge upgrade of the current Other Than Honorable Discharge to that of General Under Honorable Conditions, or Honorable.

The FSM served on active service from December 6, 1999 to August 22, 2002 at which time she was discharged due to Misconduct.

On review of the application submitted the Applicant denotes twenty-two areas / issues that she wish be reviewed by the Board as she believes they will reflect justification in change of discharge as requested.

As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174D.

We ask for the Board’s careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision.  These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the Applicant.”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2 copies)
Certificate of Completion of Marine Combat Training, dated March 31, 2000
Certificate of Completion of the AAA Driver Improvement Program, dated
    April 6, 2000
Certificate of Promotion to Private First Class, dated June 1, 2000
Certificate of Completion of Math for Marines MCI course, dated April 4, 2002
Letter regarding completion of Math for Marines MCI course, undated
Certificate of Promotion to Lance Corporal, dated October 1, 2001
Certificate of Completion of Fundamentals of Marine Corps Leadership MCI
    course, dated April 4, 2002
Letter regarding completion of Fundamentals of Marine Corps Leadership MCI
    course, undated
Certificate of Completion of Personal Financial Management MCI course, dated
    April 10, 2002
Letter concerning completion of Personal Financial Management MCI course,
    undated
Certificate of Completion of IMRL Asset Managers Course, dated June 12, 2000
Individual Qualification Record for Support Equipment Asset Manager (26 pages)
Applicant's son's birth certificate
Medical documents regarding Applicant's son, dated January 28, 2002 (2 pages)
Respiratory Equipment Check for Applicant's son's Apnea Monitor
Discharge Instructions, Naval Medical Center San Diego, dated January 28, 2002
    (2 pages)
Request for Humanitarian Reassignment from A_ M. L_ , Pediatric Social Worker
    and LT N_ B_, MC, USNR, dated February 13, 2002
Letter on Applicant's behalf to the Commandant of the Marine Corps from her
    Congressional Representative, dated March 26, 2002
Applicant’s mother's Social Service Welfare Aid approval, dated January 10, 2002
Statement from L_ A. S_, mother of Applicant (3 pages)
Physician statement from for Applicant's mother, dated April 20, 2002
Attorney statement regarding Applicant's sister's personal injury claim, dated
    March 24, 2002
Estimate of  repairs for fire damage to Applicant's mother's hours, dated February
    11, 2002
Statement from Applicant's mother explaining absence from Work First class,
    dated February 8, 2002
Applicant’s mother's Social Service Welfare increase notice, dated October 24,
    2001
U.S. Bankruptcy Court memorandum on Applicant's parents' Hearing on
    Confirmation Plan scheduled for March 20, 2002
Summons to Appear at Hearing for Applicant's parents, dated September 28, 2001
Social Services Work First documents in case of Applicant's mother (5 pages)
Applicant’s mother's Social Service Welfare increase notice, dated October 23,
    2001
Statement of financial condition from Applicant's mother, undated
Fire Damage Repair Proposal for Applicant's parents' home, dated June 14, 2000
Pat Due Notice to Applicant's father for mortgage payments, dated September 21,
    2001
Retainer Agreement by Applicant's parents for bankruptcy legal services, undated
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Notice of Chapter 13, Meeting of Creditors, and
    Deadlines, dated November 1, 2001 (2 pages)
Domestic Violence documents (2 pages)
Petition for Dissolution of Marriage, filed January 12, 2005
Letter from Applicant's Sergeant Major requesting refund of travel tickets due to
    leave denial, dated April 22, 2002
Applicants rebuttals to two Page 11 entries (2 pages)
Observation H&P Narrative & Disposition from Naval Medical Center San Diego,
    dated September 20, 2001 (4 pages)
Employment reference, dated December 28, 2004
Notice of Unemployment Insurance award, November 24, 2004
Business License, expiration date of December 31, 2005
High School Diploma, dated September 7, 1999
Military Education Summary, undated
Academic Institution Coursed Taken on Active Duty, dated February 10, 2004
Academic Transcript, College of Automotive Management, undated
Grossmont college verification of pre-registration, dated February 1, 2005
    (2 pages)
Character reference from J_ W_, undated
Local (county) criminal record check, dated December 28, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		990812 - 991205	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  991206		Date of Discharge:  020822

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  08  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  57

Highest Rank:  LCpl			MOS:  6042

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.9 (8)			Conduct:  4.0 (8)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, MUC

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

010215:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct (Unauthorized absence at or about 0731 to 0847 on 010121 by failing to report to her place of duty to wit: Squadron Duty Clerk).  Necessary corrective actions explained.  Applicant desired to make a statement.

010215:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the months of February and March because of lack of judgment.  Applicant desired to make a statement.

010226:	Statements in response to counseling entries of 010215 regarding non-recommendation for promotion and deficiencies in performance and conduct not submitted.

010318:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence at or about 0730 on 010301.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 91:
Specification: Insubordinate conduct on or about 010131.
Awarded:  Forfeiture of $521.00 per month for 2 months, bread and water for 3 days, reduction to E-1.  Forfeiture, bread and water for 3 days, and reduction suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

010318:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct (Unauthorized absence, insubordinate conduct, and failure to obey orders).  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

020213:	Applicant's pediatric social worker and medical officer at the Naval
Medical Center San Diego submit a request for humanitarian
reassignment to the Bureau of Naval Personnel on the Applicant's behalf.

020311:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the months of April, May, and June because of lack of judgment.

020509:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
Specification: Failed to follow an order or regulation at or about 1600 on  020414 by disobeying an order from Sgt W_ to stop working night shift and begin working day shift.
Awarded reduction to E-2.  Appealed 020516.

020520:	Commanding Officer, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 323, Marine
Aircraft Group 11, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing requests Applicant's administrative separation from service.  Commanding Officer's comments:  "1.  Private First Class S_ has been a discipline problem since reporting to this commend more than a year and a half ago.  Her records indicate numerous Page 11 counseling entries and two NJP's for disobedience of direct orders, disrespect to superiors, and even full-fledged disregard of standing Marine Corps Orders.
2.  Notwithstanding her lack of discipline, she has failed to demonstrate the requisite motivation and desire to learn and advance in her billet as an Individual Material Readiness List Manager.  Her SNCOIC's statement indicates that she completely failed to prepare her section for an inspection, which led to an "off track" finding for the IMRL section.  Her NCOIC, who has daily contact with her, offers numerous examples of how PFC S_'s focus is on shirking her responsibilities to this command by placing her personal interests and desires above what the Marine Corps is requiring her to do.
3.  I first came in to contact with this Marine when her lack of a family care plan became an issue.  She missed a majority of the last WESTPAC because she became pregnant by her then-NCOIC, Sergeant L_ W_, who has now become her husband.  She was required by Marine Corps Order to have a family care plan for her son in place before he was born, so as to keep her world-wide deployable.  She was told numerous times by Staff Sergeant D_, the administrative chief for this command, to prepare and submit a plan as soon as possible.  It was not until she was threatened with adverse administrative action and officially counseled that she finally complied with the order.
4.  Private First Class S_ recently was convicted at Squadron NJP for failure to obey an order.  Her consistent failure to conduct herself in accordance with Marine Corps Orders and obey direct orders from her superiors is troubling.  She demonstrated a difficulty with the truth at the proceedings that very nearly caused another charge sheet to be generated for false official statements.
5.  Private First Class S_ has proven that she will only comply with orders and do her job if she is closely monitored and constantly supervised.  This squadron is currently preparing for another deployment, and we need to have Marines who will do their job and obey orders.   This command, and the Marine Corps in general, cannot surrender the assets, time, and personnel required to retain this Marine.  I recommend PFC S_ for immediate discharge with a general characterization of service."

020625:	Review Officer, Joint Law Center, MCAS Miramar recommended to the Commanding Officer, Marine Aircraft Group 11 that Applicant's appeal of her NJP of 020509 be rejected.

020625:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Applicant advised that the least favorable characterization of service she may receive is under other than honorable conditions.  The factual basis for the separation was the Applicant's numerous Page 11 entries for disciplinary infractions and two convictions at NJP.

020625:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

020625:	Commanding Officer, Headquarters Squadron, Marine Aircraft Group 11, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing recommended the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

020708:	Commanding Officer, Marine Aircraft Group 11, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing positively endorsed recommendation for the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

020731:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

020814:	GCMCA (Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing) informs the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMSB) that he has directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020822 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B).  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 (C and D).

The Applicant contends that the disciplinary problems she encountered during her period of service were the result of personal and family problems.  The Applicant then infers that these problems were of such severity that she should have received a humanitarian transfer, as recommended by her social worker, medical officer, and Congressional Representative.  The NDRB recognizes that the Applicant was faced with many personal and family problems during her time of service.  The Board also recognizes that serving in the Marine Corps is challenging and our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve in the military.  The hardships and challenges of military life, however, do not excuse the Applicant or any Marine from accountability for misconduct.  There is no evidence in the record to suggest that the Applicant was not responsible for her misconduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions.  With regard to the recommendations for humanitarian transfer, the Board found that:
o	on 20020213 her pediatric social worker and her medical officer submitted a request on her behalf to the Bureau of Naval Personnel for such transfer;
o	on 20020326 her Congressional Representative, in response to a letter sent by the Applicant to his office, contacted the Commandant of the Marine Corps asking that due consideration be given to the Applicant in her efforts to continue her service in the Marine Corps.
The Applicant is advised that humanitarian transfers are initiated at the request of the individual Marine and are addressed to the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMEA) via the Marine's chain of command.    The record is absent of any evidence showing that the Applicant submitted an appropriate request for such transfer.  The Applicant is advised that, even if she had submitted an appropriate request, this would not have guaranteed the request would be granted.  The Applicant is further advised that humanitarian transfers are designed to solve short-term situations (i.e., less than 36 months).  Personal and family problems that can reasonably be expected to continue beyond 36 months are more appropriately resolved with a hardship discharge, which is also initiated at the request of the Marine.  In her application for discharge review, the Applicant specifically states that she did not request such discharge.  Relief on either basis is denied.

The Applicant contends that her discharge from the Marine Corps was improper as she did not consult with a legal representative nor did she have her case heard before an
administrative discharge board.  The record clearly shows that the Applicant, on 20020625, when officially notified of her command's intent to administratively separate her, was advised of her rights and, on that same date, in her response to her command's notification, elected the following:
o	to waive the right to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B;
o	to waive the right to request a hearing before and Administrative Discharge Board; and
o	to waive the right to include written statements in rebuttal to her proposed separation.
The only right the Applicant elected was the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis of her separation.  The evidence of record shows that the Applicant was afforded the appropriate due process during her administrative separation.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The Applicant also contends that her discharge from the Marine Corps was improper as she was not separated for alcoholism nor did she request discharge for the good of the service.  For the Applicant's edification, neither Secretary of the Navy nor Marine Corps regulations pertaining to administrative separation require a service member to either suffer from alcoholism or request discharge for the good of the service before that member is processed for discharge.  A Marine may be administratively processed for separation due to a pattern of misconduct when there has been a minimum of two incidents occurring within one enlistment involving conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline (the incidents not having to result in NJP).  In the Applicant's case, the record shows:
o	award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 20010318 and 20020509 for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 Unauthorized absence and 92 Failure to obey order or regulation;
o	page 13 counselings on 20010215 and 20010318 for continued deficiencies in performance and conduct;
o	a retention warning on 20010318; and
o	non-recommendations for promotion for February and March 2001 and for April, May, and June 2002, all due to lack of judgment.
Whenever a Marine is involved in such misconduct, commanders shall process the Marine for separation.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The Applicant contends that her discharge was improper as she was never informed of the long-term effects of a less-than-honorable discharge and, further, she was informed that after six months her discharge would be automatically upgraded.  The Applicant is advised that the degree to which a service member being processed for administrative separation is informed of the long-term consequences of an other than honorable discharge has no bearing on the discharge itself.  The characterization of discharge is based upon the conduct of the service member, as documented in his or her service record, and not upon the service member's understanding of the consequences.  Further, the record shows that the Applicant, on 20020625, when officially notified of her command's intent to administratively separate her, was advised of the purpose and scope of the Naval Discharge Review Board and the Board for Correction of Naval Records, as attested by her and her witness' signatures after the "Statement of the Individual" section of that document.  That document specifically states that neither board will upgrade unfavorable discharges based solely on the expiration of a set period of time following separation from service.  Relief on either basis is denied. 

The Applicant contends that her service warrants an honorable or a general characterization due to her completion of numerous training courses, promotion to higher ranks, and accumulation of MOS knowledge.  The Applicant is advised that when the service of a Marine has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A discharge with an other than honorable characterization of service is warranted when there are significant negative aspects of a member's conduct and/or performance.  The Board recognizes the Applicant's accomplishments while in the Marine Corps but also recognizes her misconduct (as described above), which marred her service.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of her characterization of service.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The Applicant contends that, since leaving the Marine Corps, she has maintained good job relationships, opened her own business, and enrolled in college.  The Applicant is advised that there is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the Marine Corps.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Board recognizes the post-service documents submitted by the Applicant including her criminal records check, college pre-registration confirmation, business license, and character references but, at this time, does not consider this sufficient to warrant an upgrade to her characterization of service.  Relief on this basis is denied.  

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to her discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 01 Sep 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, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

If you believe that 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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil”.

The names, and votes of the members of the 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