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

ex-PFC, USMCR
Docket No. MD01-00687

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010423, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  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 010928.  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/UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board:

I am writing to you because of an error made by the United States Marine Corps.  During the spring of 1996, I decided to join the U.S.Marines to help with college tuition. I graduated boot camp at Paris Island, South Carolina. Upon graduation, I was meritoriously promoted to Private First Class.  After boot camp, I attended Infantry School at Camp Lejuene, North Carolina where I was given the honor of being a fire team leader responsible for the lives of five of my fellow Marines.  After graduating from the School of Infantry, I reported to my duty station in Mobile, Alabama.  After three and a half years in the Third Force Reconnaissance Company / Fourth SCAMP Unit in Mobile, I was an expert rifleman and as a Lance Corporal was a Squad Leader accompanied by three other Sergeants.  I volunteered for many community services like Toys for Tots, Color Guards for local and non-local parades, and participated in one funeral detail for a fellow Marine.  I also participated in annual training events in Panama City, Panama and an ACIET in Fort Stewart, Georgia in 1999.  During my time at the unit in Mobile, I also attended the University of South Alabama.  There were many times when I wasn't able to attend drill weekends due to studying and extended assignments.  This was never a problem; I was allowed to make up the drills during the month.  However, during the fall of 1999, I was making up drills in the month of October, before the fiscal year ended.  My presence was never recorded, and I never even got paid for these drills.  I attended the Marine Corps Birthday Ball in November and also participated that year in the Toys for Tots program in December.  My presence, along with others was never recorded.  By February of 2000, I was informed my discharge was being processed.  Because my presence was never recorded for these drills, I received an other than Honorable Discharge and a re-enlistment code of "RE-4." This code "RE-4" prohibits me from re-enlisting in the Marines.  I have gone through many steps to try and have my re-enlistment code changed.  Since my discharge, Fourth SCAMP in Mobile, Alabama has been terminated due to many related problems like this.  I love being a Marine and consider myself an asset to the Corps.  I believe the code "RE-4" was unjustly given and trust you will do everything in your power to change this so I can further my career in the Marine Corps and extend my services for the welfare of my country.  We have a saying in the Marines, "Once a Marine, always a Marine." I feel this great honor has been taken away from me. Attached to this letter are others from my Platoon Sergeant and my Platoon Commander at the time my discharge took place.  Please help me in any way you possibly can.  Thank you and Semper Fi!  Sincerely,

Documentation

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

Character reference dated April 12, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  951109		Date of Discharge:  000518

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  01  29
	Inactive:  04  05  10

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  69

Highest Rank:  LCPL

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.5 (7)			Conduct:  4.5 (7)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Expert Rifle Badge

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE; authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

960320:	Enlistment contract into the USMCR documents acknowledgement 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.

960824:	Applicant released from initial tour of active duty for training with an Honorable by reason of completion of required active service (USMCR) IADT.

000101:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the Jan, Feb, Mar 2000 promotion period because of unsatisfactory participation.  Applicant not available for signature.

000401:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the Apr, May, Jun 2000 promotion period because of unsatisfactory participation.  Applicant not available for signature.

000210:	Commanding officer notified the applicant of unsatisfactory drill participation via certified letter.

000210:	Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested.  Applicant receipted for letter by return signature but failed to acknowledge the contents.  The failure to acknowledge official certified mail constitutes acknowledgement and waiver of all rights (MARCORSEPMAN par. 6303).

Undated:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

000320:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve.  The factual basis for this recommendation was unit records show that you failed to attend without being excused by competent authority, for the following drill dates: 4-6Feb and 22-23Jan.

000518:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.  

000518:	GCMCA [Commander, Marine Forces Reserve] directed the applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to failure to participate (Reserve not on active duty (board waived)).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 000518 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve (A, B, and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).  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 (E and F).

Issue 1.  The applicant stated his discharge was inequitable because he was allowed to make up missed drills earlier in his enlistment.  The applicant provided no documentation supporting his assertion that reserve functions he attended in Nov-Dec 99 were coordinated to make up planned absences in Jan-Feb 00.  The applicant signed a contract on 960320, while enlisting into the USMCR, that acknowledged his 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.  The applicant receipted for a letter of intent dated 000210, to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training, specifically scheduled drills for the months of January and February 2000, totaling 9 unexcused absences.  The letter was sent via certified mail, with return receipt requested.  Applicant receipted for letter by return signature but failed to acknowledge the contents.  The failure to acknowledge official certified mail constitutes acknowledgement and waiver of all rights (MARCORSEPMAN par. 6303).  It was the applicant’s responsibility to contact his chain of command prior to missing drill in order to coordinate making up an absence.  Relief denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commander, Navy Personnel, Pers 814, 5720 Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055, and the Commandant, United States Marine Corps, Code MMPE-5, Washington, DC  20380-3001.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95. 

B.  Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, MCO P1001R.1, Chapter 3, Reserve Participation and Administrative Procedures, paragraph 300.

C.  Table 6‑1 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95, Guide for Characterization of Service.

D.  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.  

E.  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.

F.  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 “afls10.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