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

 ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00600

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020402, 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 021217.  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, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

Dear Sir or Madam:

Hello! & May God bless.  Before I begin I only ask that you may adhere to this letter with an image of a man who has paid for what mistakes he has made in his military career.  A man who has written this letter as a desperate plea humbly, with morale regards and sincerity, in hopes that your decision making would have a positive outcome for his life.

Many times in the past, it appears in my service record book, that I have been unable to adjust to Marine Core Standards.  It is with the greatest sincerity of purpose that I would like the following statements to be taken into consideration.

1.  At the outset of my marine core career I have been enthusiastic, and motivated; eager and able to start what I have determined as a proud and rewarding career.  That same attitude then started to gradually fade as repeated incongruous behavior, demonstrated by my Non-Commissioned Officers seemed to take its toll on me.

2.  Although my "small" offences, taken together, seem to exaggerate my attitude as being against marine core discipline, but in all truth this is not the full picture.  I do believe I have diligently tried hard, and with care to conform to marine core standards.  I have made some mistakes in the past, but I honestly believe that I could have fulfilled my obligation to the government if the lateral change of my M.O.S. from postal clerk, to the school of Infantry had not been denied by my Mgsgt.  Certainly I have been far from perfect, but my sense of responsibility, in my opinion had been steadily growing.

3.  I do not believe that an undesirable discharge is the best I am capable of attaining.  While in the service, 9 months prior to my separation, my fiancé and I eloped whom I am still happily married to after just celebrating our 3 year anniversary.  We now have a 2 year old son, and we are both full time college students attending well known universities.  I also work as a full time armed security officer, how ever I cannot pursue any government, or state, career fields that I anticipate most eagerly on having, because they cannot honor my type of discharge.

4.  I would like to emphasize the fact, as I see it now, that I was mostly immature at the beginning of my marine core career.  I fully realize that many persons go throughout their military careers without fault, and yet there are others who do not, and who have experience difficulty in getting adjusted to the military way of life, I may have had some problem in my tour of duty, but I know that if it was not for those experiences and learned discipline I probably would have not been the productive citizen that I am today.  
Sincerely,

Documentation

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

Letter to Applicant dated December 2, 1999 (2 copies)
Applicant's DD Form 214
Letter from Applicant dated June 16, 2002
College transcript from Quaker City Aviation dated March 2, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		970618 - 970728	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970729			Date of Discharge:  991008

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  02  10
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17 Parental Consent		Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  34

Highest Rank:  PFC

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.2 (4)				Conduct:  3.8 (4)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980217:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Violation of Barracks Orders FLCCQ-22 and DOT-39-I.  Pertaining to alcoholic beverages in the barracks.  On 13 February 1998 at approximately 2200, Applicant was found drinking alcohol in the barracks by the Detachment Commanding Officer.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980730:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Absent from appointed place of duty on 1045, 3 Jun 98 to 0615, 4 Jun 98, to wit: Main Post Office.
Awarded forfeiture of $216.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days.  Forfeiture suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

980805:	Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 30Jul98.

980915:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Absent from appointed place of duty on 0625 - 1130, 17 Aug 98, to wit: Consolidated Post Office.
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 20 days.  Not appealed.

980917:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Established pattern of misconduct:  980217 Page 11 drinking alcoholic beverages in barracks; 980730 Violation Article 86 failed to be at proper place at proper time; 980902 Violation Article 86 failed to be at appointed place of duty and Article 134 broke company restriction.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

981118:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91:
Specification: Disrespected Cpl by saying to him, "Fuck you, I'm going to kick your fucking ass."
Violation of UCMJ, Article 134:
Specification: Wrongfully communicated a threat to injure Cpl by saying to him, “Fuck you, I'm going to kick your fucking ass."
Awarded correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to Pvt.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

990127:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of Jan 99 due to recent NJP.

990308:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of Mar 99 due to recent NJP.

990311:	Vacate suspended reduction to Pvt awarded at CO's NJP dated 18Nov98.

990615:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 80:
	Specification: Attempted to steal two automated teller machine cards and withdraw money.
	Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 81:
	Specification: Conspire to commit an offense under the UCMJ.
	Charge III: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 107:
	Specification: With intent to deceive, made a false statement to CID investigator.
	Charge IV: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 121:
	Specification: Steal a wallet and its contents, including three automated teller machine cards and U.S. currency of some value.
	Finding:  To Charge I, II, III and IV and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  Forfeiture of $500.00, confinement for 30 days.
	CA action 990616: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

990809:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

990809:	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

990823:	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 page 11 entries of 980217, 980917, 990127 and 990308; the nonjudicial punishments of 980730, 980916 and 981118; and the Summary Court-Martial of 990615.  

990825:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

990928:	GCMCA [Commander, 2d Force Service Support Group] 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 991008 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  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 (D and E).

Issues 1-4.  A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Marine.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions, one summary court-martial and adverse counseling entries on other occasions.  While he may feel that his immaturity and MOS were factors that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely to enhance employment opportunities, or due to the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant 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.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 Jan 97 until Present. 

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 80, attempt to steal; Article 81, conspiracy; Article 86, unauthorized absence; Article 107, lying; Article 134, communicating a threat.
 
C.  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.  

D.  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.

E.  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