ex-, USMC

                  Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20090227
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)      20050112 - 20050118   Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20050119     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20090118 Highest Rank:
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  00  Day(s)
Education Level:       AFQT:  41
MOS:  0331
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):  4.3 (12)   3.9 (12)    Fitness
Reports:
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):    Rifle   (3) (2)

Periods of CONF:

NJP:
    - 20070420:  Article NFIR (Retrieved from 3270)
      Awarded: NFIR    Suspended:  NFIR
    - 20070626:  Article 91 (Disrespect toward a superior noncommissioned
             officer)
      Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order)
      Awarded:      Suspended:
    - 20080504:  Article 86 (UA) 20080320-20080414 (25 Days)
      Article 128 (Assault)
      Awarded:      Suspended:

SCM:           SPCM:          CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:
    - 20080508:  For violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 (UA) and Article
             128 (Assault).

                    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:           Substance Abuse:
Criminal Records:
      Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:
References:
              Additional Statements:
                             From Applicant:       From Representation:
      From Congress member:
                    Other Documentation:

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

                             Applicant’s Issues

1. Wants to go to school.
2. Never received his Professional and Conduct (Pro/Con) marks from third
quarter of 2008 which impacted his overall marks.

                                  Decision

Date:  20090618        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 Government
affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the
presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The
Applicant’s record of service was marred by one NAMVC 118(11) (Page 11)
warning and three non-judicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (UA, 25 days); Article 91
(disrespect toward a superior noncommissioned officer); Article 92 (failure
to obey a lawful order, not shaving); and Article 128 (assault, striking
his wife).  The Applicant was discharged after he completed his four year
service obligation.

:  (Nondecisional)  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.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends that he never received his
third quarter Proficiency/Conduct marks in 2008, which resulted in his not
receiving an Honorable characterization by half a point.  It is the Board’s
opinion that the Applicant’s Pro/Con mark average was properly calculated.
For the Applicant’s edification, when the effective date of any other
reporting occasion coincides with the Semiannual (SA) marking periods (31st
of January, July), the reporting occasion [e.g., Discharge (DC), Reduction
(RD), and Transfer (TR)] has precedence over SA markings.  In 2008, the
Applicant received three types of marking periods: SA, RD, and TR.  When
the Applicant was separated, his DC markings had precedence over his SA
markings.

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 General (Under Honorable Conditions), and the narrative reason for
separation shall remain Completion of Required Active Service.

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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional
Reviews and Automatic Upgrades.

                          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.


                  ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  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 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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are
eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the 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 additional evidence related to this discharge.
Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not
required.  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 Navy Annex, Washington, DC
20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for
post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 subsequently is processed for an administrative
involuntary separation or is referred to a court-martial for misconduct,
the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case
remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.
If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for
misconduct, 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 Board for
Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 Naval service.  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 may be provided to the Board include proof of
educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of
community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and
certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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