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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00793

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020515, 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 030214.  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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  To Whom this may concern,

I regret any wrong or accusations of wrong doing during my terms of service.  I apologize for any thing I've done.  I hope that the board upgrade my discharge into an honorable discharge. I want to get on with my life, provide for my family and continue you my college education.  I pray that the board can help me so I can better my future and provide for my children.  Thank you.

Documentation

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

Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		930318 - 930411	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  930412		Date of Discharge:  950925

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  05  14
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  58

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.7 (6)			Conduct:  3.7 (6)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, Letter of Appreciation

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.2.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

940407:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Dereliction of duties as follows: failure to secure classified material and not paying attention to detail in regular duties.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

940518:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Financial irresponsibility, specifically, presenting checks or drafts without sufficient funds in the account.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

940525:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of June 1994 because of my financial irresponsibility.

940620:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of July 1994 because of financial irresponsibility.

940728:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134:
Specification: With intent to defraud, uttered checks totalling $314.54 and failing to maintain sufficient funds in Nations Bank for payment of such checks.
Awarded forfeiture of $466.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to Pvt.  Forfeiture suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

940728:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of August 1994 because of his recent nonjudicial punishment.

940825:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of September 1994 because of his recent nonjudicial punishment.

940927:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of October 1994 because of his recent nonjudicial punishment.

941027:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of November 1994 because of recent nonjudicial punishment.

941110:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of December 1994 because of his recent nonjudicial punishment.

941227:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of January 1995 due to nonjudicial punishment held on 940728.

950113:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to secure classified materials entrusted to Applicant in the performance of his duties; presenting checks or drafts without sufficient funds in the checking account to cover them, failure to pay just debts, substandard performance of duties in maintaining the mail room in a neat, orderly manner as it was his duty to do, failure to sort, distribute, and do rework of mail in a timely manner as it was his duty to do, failure to be at appointed place of duty from 0830 to 1000 on 941221, wrongful communication of a threat to Seaman Apprentice H_ on 950103 and failure to seek assistance in  monetary matters.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

950221:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of February 1995 due to his financial irresponsibility

950221:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of March 1995 due to his financial irresponsibility.

950420:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs):
Specification 1: With intent to deceive, wrongfully possess official naval pass well knowing the same was unauthorized.
Specification 2: Dishonorably fail to pay BOQ for outstanding phone bill.
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to Pvt.  Forfeiture suspended for 2 months.  Not appealed.

950628:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

950629:	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

950629:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.  The factual basis for this recommendation was a documented series of minor disciplinary infractions during the current enlistment consisting of three (3) page 11 counseling entries, and two (2) nonjudicial punishments. 

950726:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

950911:	GCMCA [Commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Atlantic] directed the Applicant's discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 950925 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions (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).

Issue 1.  A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions, adverse counseling entries on other occasions, and an average conduct evaluation below the standard required for an honorable characterization of service.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  It must be noted that most Marines serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.   In fairness to those Marines, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due.  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 is evident 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.  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 18 Aug 95until 30 Jan 97. 

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 134, failure to pay debts.

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