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

  ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00676

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030305.  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.

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 four to one that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/HARDSHIP, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6407.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I was separated from the United States Marine Corps with 2 years, 6 months, and 14 days, on August 15, 2001.  My type of separation was a hardship discharge with a character of service as General (With Honorable Conditions), Separation Code KDB1, Reentry code RE-3H.

·Request my character of serve be changed to Honorable.

·Request that DD-214 Block 18 remarks be changed to read:  Contributed to MGIB $1200.00 or a DD-215 be issued with the correction.

I was a very good Marine while I was in the military.  I was holding a Sergeant’s billet as a Lance Corporal supervising two other Marines during my last year of service.  Although I was going through some hard times in my life and had to be discharged, I still feel that I should have received an honorable discharge.  My OIC and my SNCOIC felt that I should be discharged.  I did my work well while I was enlisted (See Document 2 attached).  My end of service Proficiency and Conduct marks were not provided to me, but my monthly pros and cons ranged from 4.5-4.6 respectively.

My father who was very ill did indeed pass away and I am now married and doing well.  Since my hardship no longer exists, I would like to go to college using the MGIB that I did contribute $1200.00 to (See Document 3 attached).  

As I indicated at the beginning of this letter because I did serve honorably over 24 months, I am requesting that my character of service be changed to Honorable and the correct information be provided on my contribution to the MGIB.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Signed by K_ P_ (T_) (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Endorsement on Applicant’s Hardship Request dtd May 7, 2001
Hardship Discharge recommendation from GySgt D_ J. M_, USMC
Applicant’s LES dtd July 13, 2001
Applicant’s Verification of Employment from Carteret Correctional Center, Newport, NC, dtd Feb 18, 2003
State of North Carolina Criminal Record Check dtd Feb 21, 2003
Copy of DD Form 214
Coastal Carolina Community Report Transcript (10/21/02)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		980805 - 990131	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990201		Date of Discharge:  010815

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  02  06  15 (Doesn’t exclude lost time of 1 day)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17 with Parental consent

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  71

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.4 (6)		Conduct:  4.2 (6)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  CoA (2)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  1 

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/HARDSHIP,  authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6407.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990708:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  On or about 0515, 990628, without authority, absent herself from her unit, to wit MTIC Marine Corps Detachment, located at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, and did remain so absent until her return on or about 0830, 990629.
Awarded forfeiture of $479.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended for 3 months), restriction and extra duties for 14 days.  Not appealed. 

001222:	Applicant acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for January 2001 due to immaturity.

010209:	Applicant acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for February 2001 due to immaturity.

010226:	Applicant requested hardship discharge due to parents’ illness.

010307:	Applicant acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for March 2001 due to immaturity.

010413:	Mental Health Outpatient, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune:  Pt is 1 year divorced white female with 2 years, 2 months continued active service who was referred for eval by Dr. B_ for evaluation for depression.  At the time of referral, she was 27 weeks pregnant with her first child.  She had reported over the past three weeks prior to seeing Dr. B_, she had felt that she wanted to cry all the time and felt increasing anxiety about her baby.  She stated that her father had recently died.  Her father had a history of mental illness, however, the pt had no previous diagnosis of mental illness.  She had had difficulty sleeping, but denied any changes in appetite.  She has lived in this area approximately two years, but only has one friend in the area.
	Diagnoses:
	AXIS I:      Bereavement.  Rule out Adjustment Disorder with Depression.
	AXIS II:     None.
	AXIS III:    Pregnancy (Approximately 30 weeks).
	AXIS IV:    Psychosocial Stressors. Refer to the List in the Diagnostic 
       Impression.
	AXIS V:    GAF 65 (Current).
	Recommendation:  1.  This pt is considered psychologically fit and suitable for full duty at her regular duty station.  Although the pt does not have a personality disorder or a significant mental illness, she is significantly stressed by her life situation including her pregnancy.  It is believed that it would be beneficial to the pt to be administratively separated from the Marine Corps due to the pregnancy and all of the other stressors with which the pt must cope.  A memo will be written to her command stating this recommendation.
	2.  A follow-up is planned for this pt on May 1 at 1400.  At that time, assessment will continue and treatment for her bereavement issues and her depressive symptoms will continue.
	3.  Pt was asked today to write a letter to her father stating all of the things she would like to tell him and also to tell him good-bye and to bring this letter with her to her next treatment session as part of her treatment.

010417:	Applicant acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for April 2001 due to lack of maturity.

010430:	Applicant requested hardship discharge again, since she was unable to get her first request in before her father’s death on March 13, 2001.  Request based on bereavement, being a mother with no emotional, financial, or physical support.  Estimated date of Applicant’s delivery is 25 June 2001.

010517:	Commanding Officer, Bravo Company, Hdqtrs & Support Battalion, MCB, Camp Lejeune, did not concur with the Section recommendation for Applicant’s hardship discharge, recommended retention until end of active service on 31 January 2003. 

010802:	Counseled concerning deficiency.  [Violation of Article 134, adultery and falsifying an official document.]  Advised of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

010809:	CO, Hdqtrs & Support Battalion, MCB, Camp Lejeune, approved Applicant’s request and directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of hardship.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010815 under honorable conditions (general) due to hardship (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.  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, an adverse counseling entry on another occasion, and non-recommendations for promotion.  The characterization of service for administrative separations based upon hardship will be honorable or under honorable conditions (general) as determined by the separation authority.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief is therefore denied.

The Board recommended that the DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect the Applicant’s contribution to the Montgomery GI Bill.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her 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.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documents that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate her characterization of service sufficient to warrant an upgrade.  Relief denied.

The Applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  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, effective 18 August 1995, paragraph 6407, DEPENDENCY OR HARDSHIP.

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