ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20100512
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:	NONE		Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  19960216	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months  (6 yrs SMCR + 2 yrs IRR)
Date of Discharge:  20030305	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:
	Inactive:	  Year(s)    Month(s)  19  Day(s)
	Active:	  Year(s)    Month(s)  28  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  38
MOS:  0151
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   / 	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  

Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJP:  	SCM:  	SPCM:  	  CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  1

- 20020227:	For unsatisfactory participation in the Marine Corps Reserves and corrective actions to return to satisfactory drill status.

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 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 1 September 2001 
until Present.

B.  Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, MCO P1001R.1, Chapter 3, Reserve Participation and Administrative Procedures, paragraph 3300.

C.  Table 6‑1 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001, Guide for Characterization of Service.

D.  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

Decisional issues: The Applicant contends that her discharge was improper and is seeking an upgrade in her characterization of service at discharge to Honorable.  The Applicant contends that her personal family situation made drilling untenable and that her command was less than enthusiastic in helping her resolve the situation; as such, she contends that her personal situation warrants consideration in mitigation of the characterization of her service determination.   

Decision

Date:  20110628	                Location: Washington D.C.	 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 NDRB 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 Applicant identified one decisional issue for the NDRB’s consideration.  Additionally, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service did not include any 6105 retention-counseling warnings or administrative or punitive punishments.  The Applicant provided no additional documentation for consideration by the NDRB or in rebuttal to the NDRB’s presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs other than her personal statement. 

The Applicant entered military service on an 8-year reservist contract with no waivers to enlistment.  The Applicant signed a contract on 08 May 1996, acknowledging her understanding of the requirement to participate in 48 scheduled drills and not less than 14 days of annual training per year - for 6 years - upon completion of initial active duty training.  She successfully completed recruit training and her MOS school and was discharged from the Active Duty component on 26 October 1996 for further assignment with her designated Selected Marine Corps Reserve Unit.    

Due to failing to attend 50 scheduled drill periods, the command recommended that she be separated administratively from the Selected Marine Corps Reserve to the Separation Authority – Commander, Marine Forces Reserve.  The Applicant was notified of the command’s proposed actions in regards to her unsatisfactory performance, in writing, via certified U.S. postal carrier to her official home of record.  The letter of notification dated 19 March 2002 identified the reason and justification for the command’s proposal to separate administratively the Applicant under other than honorable conditions for her failure to participate in reserve training.  The notification by return signature was receipted for, but the Applicant failed to acknowledge the contents.  The failure to acknowledge official certified mail constitutes acknowledgment and waiver of all rights in accordance with paragraph 6303 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN).  

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends that her discharge was improper and is seeking an upgrade in her characterization of service at discharge to Honorable.  The Applicant contends that her personal family situation made drilling untenable and that her command was less than enthusiastic in helping her resolve the situation; as such, she contends that her personal situation warrants consideration in mitigation of the characterization.

The Applicant contends that her divorce and unplanned requirement to be a single parent caused her to be unable to attend drill and forced her to choose between her daughter and the Marine Corps.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the Marine Corps is challenging.  Most members of the Marine Corps and Marine Corps Reserve serve honorably and earn an honorable discharge.  In fairness to those service members, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that the undeserving receive no higher characterization than is due.  The Applicant’s child was born in January 1998; her divorce action was completed in June 1999.  The Applicant’s 12-month period of unexcused absence from the mandatory 48 drills and 14 days of Annual Training was from March 2001 to February 2002; prior to this period of extended absence, the record of evidence shows that she received an 

extensive period of excused absences from her command.  The NDRB determined that the Applicant was provided ample opportunity to recover from her divorce proceedings and to develop an adequate family care program prior to being recommended for separation due to failure to participate.   

When the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, it is appropriate to characterize that service under Honorable conditions.  An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service.  The NDRB determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, involved multiple acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service member; the awarded characterization was appropriate, an upgrade would be inappropriate.

The NDRB found no error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion the might afford the Applicant relief.  The Applicant was properly discharged under other than honorable conditions due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB found that the discharge was both proper and equitable.  It would be inappropriate to grant an upgrade.  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 NDRB determined that   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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews and Post-Service Conduct.

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 Disabled 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), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 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