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

 ex-PVT, USMCR 
Docket No. MD03-00673

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030305.  The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance discharge review hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant listed American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A personal appearance discharge review hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040330.  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 at the time of issue.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Failure to Participate (Reserve not on active duty) (administrative discharge board required but waived); authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  Dear sir/madam I enlisted in the Marine Corp reserve in 4/84.  During that time I was contracted for 6 yrs straight.  Out of those six years I served 5 years loyally and faithfully, maintaining a good record.  Until, at that time my fiancé became pregnant with my daughter who was born 5/89.  I later became a single parent, before my daughter was a year old.  With this responsibility,  I had a opportunity to become a manager of footlocker witch required all trainees and assistant managers to work on the weekends and I made a decision.  If I would have knows then that I could have requested an early discharged I would have.  I also found out that they changed the enlistment time shortly after.  One of my biggest regrets is not finding out 12 years sooner what I could have done to make this right.  Please accept my request for a honorable discharge.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (American Legion):

“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 this application.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of Chronological Record (1070)
Outstanding service award
Letter from M_ J. A_
Letter from A_ M_ F_ B_
Letter from D_ S_
Certificate of Appreciation
Certificate of Provisional Instructor
Letter from E_ E. B_
Certificate of training from MD EDTI
Letter from D_ W_
Associate of Arts degree certificate
Letter of Recognition
Notary Public commission

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  840411		Date of Discharge:  891020

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  05  17
	Inactive:  05  00  23

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  26

Highest Rank:  CPL

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.0 (12)		Conduct:  3.9 (12)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, MM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Failure to Participate (Reserve not on active duty) (administrative discharge board required but waived); authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

840410:	Enlistment contract into the USMCR documents acknowledgement of the requirement to participate in 48 scheduled drills and not less than 14 days of annual training per year for 6 years upon completion of initial active duty training.

881203:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Concerning unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve due to unexcused absences from regular scheduled drills.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

881206:	Commanding Officer notified the Applicant of unsatisfactory drill participation via joint letter.

890301:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Concerning unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve due to unexcused absences from regular scheduled drills.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

890301:	Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was hand delivered via certified mail, return receipt requested.  

890301:  	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.

890314:	Reduced to LCpl.

890317:	Reduced to PFC.

890320:	Reduced to Pvt.

890406:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve.  The factual basis for this recommendation was excessive unexcused absences from regularly scheduled drills.  On 14 October 1988, SNMR failed to attend drill.  SNMR did however, attend drill on 15-16 October 1988.  When questioned why he missed his previous drill, SNMR stated he had to work late.  During December of 1988, SNMR failed to drill.  Telephonic contact was made.  SNMR’s wife stated SNMR was at work.  As a result an Unsatisfactory Letter was mailed.  SNMR failed to respond.  During January of 1989, SNMR failed to drill.  Telephonic contact was attempted on both occasions, but proven unsuccessful.  SNMR was not at work.  During January of 1989, SNMR failed to drill.  Again, telephonic contact was attempted on both occasions, but proven unsuccessful.  SNMR was not at home.  On 1 March 1989, (day before ATD) a frost call was made to SNMR residence.  SNMR stated he had no intentions on going to ATD as well as coming back to drill.  An appointment was scheduled for 1400 on 1 March 1989 at the Reserve Center.  SNMR reported to the Reserve Center at 1406 on 1 March 1989.  SNMR stated he received a promotion at work and cannot afford to jeopardize his career.  SNMR has accumulated 22 unexcused absences and has made his intentions perfectly clear.

890929:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.  

891003:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 4th MARDIV] directed the Applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19891020 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve (A, B, and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).  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 (E and F).

Issue 1.  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 failure to participate in his reserve unit drills.  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 or general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  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.  Despite the positive accomplishments the Applicant has made since his discharge, 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 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 950817) states that a Marine may be separated for unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve under criteria established in MCO P10014.1.

B.  Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, MCO P10014.1.

C.  Table 6-1, Guide for Characterization of Service, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 950817).

D.  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.  

E.  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.

F.  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