ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20131025
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)	20080620 - 20090713  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20090714	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20130713	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  00  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  91
MOS:  1142 / 1171
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   (13) /  (13)	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle     KDSM  (2) CoC (2) CoA LoA (2) MM (3)

Periods of CONF:  

NJP:  

- 20100722:	Article  (Failure to obey order or regulation, 3 specifications)
	Specification 1: On 20100716 - 20100717, you returned to MCAS Futenma after 2400.
	Specification 2: On 20100716 - 20100717, you failed to report that you became separated from your liberty buddies within 30 minutes. 
	Specification 3: On 20100716 - 20100717, you purchased and consumed alcohol at the age of 19.
	Awarded:     Suspended:    

- 20110324:	Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, failed to have a liberty buddy)
	Awarded:      Suspended:   

- 20130206:	Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, violating a Military Protective Order)
	Awarded:      Suspended:    [Vacated on 20130228]

- 20130419:	Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, to wit: wrongfully possessing controlled substance and analogues (designer drugs))
	Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel)
	Awarded:      Suspended:   

SCM:  	SPCM:  	CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20100722:	For violation of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation.  Specification 1: You returned to MCAS Futenma after 2400.  Specification 2: You became separated from your liberty buddies and failed to report it to the command within 30 minutes.  Specification 3: You purchased and consumed alcohol at the age of 19.
 
- 20100824:	For your assignment of a 3.9 Conduct mark for 20100731 semi-annual reporting period.

- 20110324:	For violation of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, not having a liberty buddy on 20110202.

- 20130125:	For failure to go to appointed place of duty on various occasions between 20130117 to 20130122.

- 20130206:	For violation of Article 90, Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer to not make contact with a protected person.

- 20130419:	For your recent Battalion NJP concerning the following misconduct, Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation (wrongfully possessing controlled substance and analogues (designer drugs)) and Article 111, Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel (POV with a BAC of  .08 or higher).

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.  Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION.

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 his in-service conduct and completion of his enlistment warrant an upgrade.
2.	The Applicant contends his Proficiency and Conduct marks during his last 4 months of service were uncharacteristically low.
3.	The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants an upgrade.

Decision

Date:  20140501		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 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 Applicant’s record of service included  6105 counseling warnings and   for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, violating a Military Protective Order), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 5 specifications), and Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel).  The Applicant completed his required active service and was discharged with an Under Honorable Conditions (General) characterization of service due to his average Conduct marks during his enlistment being below the level required to receive an Honorable characterization of service. 

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends his in-service conduct and completion of his enlistment warrant an upgrade.  The Applicant further contends his Proficiency and Conduct marks during his last 4 months of service were uncharacteristically low.  The record of service shows the Applicant demonstrated an extensive and continued pattern of misconduct that was a willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract honorably.  In accordance with Paragraph 1004 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, an Honorable characterization of service upon the expiration of active duty is appropriate when the quality of a Marine’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel.  Therefore, characterization of service will be Honorable for Marines with average Proficiency marks of 3.0 or higher and average Conduct marks of 4.0 or higher.  The Applicant completed his obligated service and his overall marks for Proficiency and Conduct were 3.5 and 3.2, respectively.  The NDRB noted that the Applicant should not have received semi-annual (SA) marks on 31 July 2013 since he received transfer (TR) marks on 13 July 2013, which is within 90 days of the SA period.  By removing the SA marks from 31 July 2013, the Applicant’s Proficiency and Conduct average marks are 3.8 and 3.5, respectively, which is still below the minimum to receive an Honorable discharge.  The NDRB determined the Applicant’s other reporting periods and marks were in accordance with regulations and consistent with the Applicant’s extensive misconduct.  Based on the Applicant’s in-service record, the NDRB determined the Applicant is fortunate that he was allowed to reach his completion of required active service and not be administratively separated Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Serious Offense), Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct), or Misconduct (Drug Abuse).  The NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied. 

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants an upgrade.  The NDRB considers 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.  The Applicant provided a personal statement and a police record check.  The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum, however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration.  The Applicant had 6 retention warnings and 4 NJPs during his 

enlistment.  The NDRB determined the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration.  The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations.  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 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), 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