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

 ex-PFC, USMC 
Docket No. MD03-00941

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030502.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgment letter, the Applicant was informed that he was approaching the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area.  Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040312.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, 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:  UNCHARACTERIZED/Convenience of the Government, Condition not a physical disability, (without administrative discharge board), MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.a(9). 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “First let me thank you for reviewing my case.  I know your time is limited so I will be as brief and thorough as possible.  With this review I hope to have my discharge changed to either Honorable or General/Under Honorable Conditions.  The purpose of this request is so I may re-enlist in the United States Marine Corps.  As you see by the enclosed Marine Corps documentation my discharge was entry level based solely on two separate trips to medical.  I also believe my discharge was in part due to several letters my mother had written to the Marine Corps as well as to the congressman of the state of Kentucky.  In 1983 my brother LCPL W_ G_ was killed in Beirut, I believe my mother used this as reason to push my discharge along.  Upon hearing of my discharge I immediately informed my Sr. Drill Instructor that I wanted to stay in the Marine Corps he said there was nothing he could do and I was discharged the following week.  These are all of the details I have regarding this matter, your help would be greatly appreciated.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Character reference from B_ F_
Letter from C_ C_
Letter on performance from H_ S_
EMT Education Program certificate
EMT certificate
EMT registry certificate
Seven certificates of training/course completion
Lexington, KY criminal record check (6 pp.)
81 pages from Applicant’s service and medical records

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:    None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		890913 - 890925	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  890926		Date of Discharge:  891102

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  00  01  07
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  53

Highest Rank:  PFC

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):  None

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNCHARACTERIZED/Convenience of the Government, Condition not a physical disability, (without administrative discharge board), MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.2.a(9).
 
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

891023:	Admitted to Medical Rehabilitation Platoon for low back pain.

891024:	Medical officer recommended COG discharge for chronic lumbo-sacral strain.

891027:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for an uncharacterized discharge by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a physical disability - chronic lumbo-sacral strain.

891027:	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.

891027:	Commanding Officer recommended an uncharacterized discharge by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a physical disability - chronic lumbo-sacral strain.  The factual basis for this recommendation was the physical condition interfered with Applicant’s performance of duty and did not permit him to complete recruit training.  

891102:	GCMCA [CG, MCRD/ERR] directed the Applicant's uncharacterized discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a condition not a physical disability.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19891102 with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a physical disability – chronic lumbo-sacral strain (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.  By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service as “uncharacterized” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance or conduct which would merit an “honorable” characterization.  The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than two months in the military to warrant a change of discharge.  With respect to non-service related administrative matters, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) characterization.  Relief is therefore denied.

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.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

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.  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 P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 950817), paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

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