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

  ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00930

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030430.  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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040401.  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/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  Under current standards, I would not receive the type of discharge I did.

2.  I received letters of recommendation.

3.  I was close to finishing my tour that it was unfair to give me discharge.

4.  My discharge was based on many offenses, but they were mostly only minor offenses.”

Documentation

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

None

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:  960213		Date of Discharge:  990409

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  01  27
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  78

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.1 (7)			Conduct:  4.1 (7)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

960112:	Enlistment medical examination:  Height: 69.5”.  Weight: 205.  Note:  Max 215, Min 123.

960919:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Substandard academic performance and the inability to assimilate technical material.  My performance is below minimum academic standards and I have been disenrolled and reclassified.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980130:	CO referred Applicant to Credentialed Health Care Provider since he does not meet acceptable Marine Corps Standards with a weight of 229 lbs and body fat of 33.0 percent, with maximum weight of 186 lbs and advised Applicant that the loss of 7.1 lbs per month and total of 43 pounds within a 6 month period is a realistic goal.  Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider did not agree with goal set by Commanding Officer.  Comments: Physiological weight loss should not exceed more than 4 lbs/month.  Suggested a weight loss of 4 lbs/month for a total of 43 lbs over 10 months

980130:	Applicant's physical condition is not due to a pathological disorder, fit for participation in physical exercise program.

980203:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to conform to Marine Corps height and weight standards.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980406:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to maintain minimum physical fitness standards, specifically, your failure of the PFT on 980225.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980728:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
Specification: Fail to obey SqdnO 1050.1E on 980703 by visiting Mexico without an Out-of-Bounds pass.
Awarded forfeiture of $568.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 50 days.  Forfeiture and restriction for 20 days suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

980922:	CO referred Applicant to Credentialed Health Care Provider since he does not meet acceptable Marine Corps Standards with a weight of 207 lbs, and body fat of 27 percent and advised Applicant that the loss of 7 lbs per month and total of 21 pounds within a 3 month period is a realistic goal.

980922:	Applicant's physical condition is not due to a pathological disorder, fit for participation in physical exercise program.  Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider did not agree with goal set by Commanding Officer.  Comments: Weight loss should not be sustained greater than 4-5 lbs/month.  Member shows some progress but will require vigorous efforts to make dietary changes in conjunction with regular exercise.  Recommend 5 lbs/month for 3 months with reevaluation at that time.

990115:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to follow instructions and orders given by your NCO’s, specifically in conducting a field day at Barracks 724 on 981210.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

990208:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties.  The basis for discharge is your failure to make satisfactory progress in conforming to Marine Corps height and weight standards.

990210:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted 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.

990226:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to unsatisfactory performance of duties.  Applicant started weight control program at 223 lbs.  Current weight is 206 lbs.  Weight goal was 186 lbs.

990311:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Repeated infractions of being UA from your appointed place of duty.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

990323:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing] advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the Applicant's discharge was directed with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason unsatisfactory performance.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990409 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to unsatisfactory performance of duties (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).

Issues 1-4.  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, adverse counseling entries on other occasions, and failure to conform to height/weight standards.  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.  The criteria for discharge under honorable conditions (general) has not changed since the Applicant’s discharge.  An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate.  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.

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 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 to Present, states that a Marine may be separated if the Marine is unqualified for further service by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

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