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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00065

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991014, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000727.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  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-Pattern of misconduct (with admin discharge board), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues
 
Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant
Employment Reference Letters (2)
Volunteering Services Letter from Boys and Girl Club in Palm Spring, CA
Copy of Criminal Record Report

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USAR		831018 - 840309	HON
		   USMC		None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		850207 - 850317	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  850318		Date of Discharge:  880908

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  03  05  21
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  34

Highest Rank:  LCPL

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.9 (13)		Conduct:  3.9 (13)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  3 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONSMisconduct – Pattern of misconduct (with admin discharge board), authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

850904:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did on or about 2300, 850902, without authority absent himself from his appointed place of duty, to wit: Sea School, HQSVCBN, MCRD, San Diego, CA until 1730, 850903.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 7 days.  Not appealed.

860116:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0800, 860104 until 1700, 860107 [3days] from "C" Co, 1stBn, 4thMar.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 14 days.  Not appealed.

861126:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Willfully disobeyed lawful order of Cpl Q______, E.L., USMC, to go to building 1522.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $190.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 14 days.  Not appealed.

870514:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespectful to Cpl H_______, by using profanity; violation of UCMJ Article 91: Willfully disobeyed order from Cpl W________, to check the medical statue of a fellow Marine; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Disorderly in public.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $150.00 per month for 2 months, extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-2.  Not appealed.

880722:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Lack of MOS knowledge , marginal performance, and unprofessional attitude] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued

880907:	SCM for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Without authority, at or about 0345, 880606 fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Morning formation on the grinder adjacent to building #1450;  Spec 2: Without authority, at or about 0620, 880616, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Morning formation on the grinder adjacent to building #1450.
	Findings to Charge 1 and specifications thereunder, guilty.	
Sentenced to CHL for 30 days, reduction to E-1.
	CA (880908) Approved and ordered executed.

880929:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

881005:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

881005:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  The factual basis for this recommendation was Pvt J______ failure to conform to the standards of the Marine Corps.  During his current enlistment, he has received four nonjudicial punishments and a summary court-martial…. He has been offered counseling to alter his attitude but he has continually exhibited poor performance and improper behavior.  Consequently, Pvt J_____ has demonstrated no further potential for continued service in the United States Marine Corps. 

881104:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

881114:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

881121:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 7th Marine Expeditionary Brigade, FMF, Twentynine Palms, California] 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 881214 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (B, Part IV).  However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that 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.  The applicant provided two letters of recommendation from his employers and one for volunteer services as documentation of his post-service.  The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, any additional documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore no relief will be granted.  He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16C), Change 4, effective 29 Jul 87 until 26 Jun 89.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 “afls14.jag.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:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023