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

ex-Sgt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-01059

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020722, 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 030410.  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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – Commission of a serious offense (all other) admin discharge board required but waived, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  I would like to say until this time I did not know my discharge could be reviewed.  My discharge was based on the fact that I was not recuting the proper amount of enlistees. I had requested to be sent to the Fleet Marine Force for I was a outstanding combat marine and was advancing in my MOS 0313.  In which I received a Bronze Star w/V device and I was plt. Sgt and my fit reps were outstanding.

I would also request my RE code change so I can get back into the services.
I was also discharge a year early and was on the list for SSgt and ready to reenlist.

Documentation

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

Applicant's DD Form 214
One page from Applicant's service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USMCR(J)		830729 - 840702	COG
	Active:   USMC		840703 - 880128	HON
		   USMC		880129 - 910719	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910720		Date of Discharge:  930531

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  10  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  25			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  35

Highest Rank:  Sgt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages:  The enlisted performance reports were available to the Board for review.

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Bronze Star with Combat V, CAR, NUC, MUC, GCM w/1 Star, NDSM, SASM w/2 Stars, SSDR, N&MCOSR, KLM, Letter of Recognition, MM, Certificate of Appreciation, Letter of Appreciation (5)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct-Commission of a serious offense (all other) admin discharge board required but waived, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

910720:	Applicant reenlisted for 4 years.

930220:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to effectively prospect and meet mission requirements.  Failure to adhere to sound systematic recruiting principals.  Allowing personal affairs to interfere with daily duties and responsibilities.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

930401:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134:
Specification: Make and utter to NAS Dallas certain checks, #1882 for $50.00 and #1885 for $31.20 for the purchase of cash/merchandise, and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds in the Navy Federal Credit Union for payment of such checks in full upon presentation for payment.
Awarded forfeiture of $713.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 30 days.  Forfeiture and restriction suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

930401:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to maintain financial stability as evidenced by bouncing 2 checks aboard NAS Dallas and by bouncing 5 other checks in the greater Dallas area which resulted in 5 warrants for arrest.  As a result of these warrants, Applicant was subsequently arrested on 930310 and will be liable for these in the civilian judicial system.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

930409:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

930415:	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.

930426:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  The factual basis for this recommendation was the issuance of seven worthless checks of a total value in excess of $450.00 for which Applicant did not make timely restitution. 

930518:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

930524:	GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Western Recruiting Region, San Diego, CA] directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 930531 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (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 one occasion for the commission of a serious offense 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.  Despite the positive aspects of the Applicant’s total record of service, an upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  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.  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 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 The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95. 

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, uttering worthless checks.

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