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

 ex-LCpl, USMC 
Docket No. MD03-00457

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030124.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representative by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040212.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/DISABILITY, EXISTED PRIOR TO SERVICE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 8404.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED I DID NOTHING DURING MY TERM OF SERVICE TO HAVE RECEIVED A GENERAL UNDER HONORALBE CONDITIONS DISCHARGE.  I SERVED MY COUNTRY HONORABLY AND FAITHFULLY AND DID EVERYTHING I WAS TOLD TO DO.  I WAS RELEASED FROM SERVICE BECAUSE OF A MEDICAL CONDITION.  I WAS NOT TOLD THAT I WAS TO RECEIVE ANYTHING BUT AN HONORABLE DISCHARGE.  I THOUGHT MY DISCHARGE WOULD BE HONORABLE.  I DO NOT DESERVE ANTHING ELSE.  PLEASE CHANGE MY DISCHARGE TO “HONORABLE.”

Applicant indicated additional issues as an attachment to this application.  None were found. 

Applicant also indicated previous submission of an application on 8/15/02 and was completing this application in order to submit additional issues.  Earlier application is not on file with this Board.

2.  (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of the application.”

Documentation

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

3 Copies of DD Form 214 (Member – 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		010210 - 010326	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010327		Date of Discharge:  020814

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  01  04  18
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  34

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  NMF*			Conduct:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, NDSM, OSR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

*No Marks Found in service record book

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/DISABILITY, EXISTED PRIOR TO SERVICE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 8404.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

020227:	Medical Board, U.S. NAVHOSP, Okinawa, conducted evaluation with Primary Diagnosis of Generalized Epilepsy.  Referred the medical board to the Physical Evaluation Board for determination.

020516:	Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) determined Applicant unfit for service due to diagnosis of Generalized Epilepsy with a disability rating of 0% and recommended separation from active duty without benefits.

020712:	Applicant accepted the finding of the PEB and waived right to a formal hearing.

020814:	DD Form 214 issued reflecting discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of disability, existed prior to service.

Discharge package is missing from the service record

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020814 under honorable conditions (general) due to disability, existed prior to service, not eligible for severance pay (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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 (C and D).

Issue 1.  When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  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.  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.
The Board presumed that the Applicant’s administrative separation package and/or proficiency and conduct markings would support the characterization of service under honorable conditions (general).  The statements and documentation provided by the Applicant do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  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.  Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E) paragraph 8404 DISCHARGE FOR DISABILITY EXISTING PRIOR TO SERVICE.

B.  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.  

C.  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.

D.  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