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

 ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00838

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020515, 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.  In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that he was approaching the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area.  Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030311.  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 (admin discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

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:

Job/character reference, dated January 7, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		850408 - 850916	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  850917		Date of Discharge:  870515

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  07  29
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  45

Highest Rank:  PFC

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.8 (5)			Conduct:  3.6 (5)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct-Pattern of misconduct (admin discharge board required but waived), authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

860630:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Applicant must be constantly supervised, lacks initiative, and has expressed dislike for authority.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

860725:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91:
Specification: Willfully disobeyed LCpl's order to clean his weapon and follow orders on 1000, 860717.
Awarded forfeiture of $167.00 per month for 1 month.  Forfeiture suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

870223:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Go from appointed place of duty on 1100, 870121, to wit: Company area.
Awarded forfeiture of $150.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days.  Not appealed.

870330:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Assigned to participate in Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Program at Jacksonville, FL on 21 January 1987, but failed to complete this program due to missing movement.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

870401:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Failure to go at time prescribed to morning Alcohol Anonymous formation at 0900, 870314.
Awarded forfeiture of $325.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days.  Forfeiture suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

870410:	Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at NJP dated 870401.

870423:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

870423:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult 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.

870423:	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 nonjudicial punishments of 25 July 1986, 23 February 1987 and 1 April 1987, and adverse page 11 entries of 30 June 1986 and 30 March 1987. 

870430:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

870504:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Marine Division, Fleet Marine Force, Camp Lejeune] 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 870515 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).

The Applicant introduced no issues for consideration by the Board.  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 and adverse counseling entries on other occasions.  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.  Relief 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 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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210 MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16C), Change 2, effective 15 Apr 84 until 28 Jul 87.

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 86, unauthorized absence.

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