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

 ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01290

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030724.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20040430.  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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.2.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  I feel that my discharge was inappropriate and processed with more severity then it should have been.  I served faithfully and in my opinion, honorably, during my tenure in the Marine Corps.  I completed any/all tasks pertaining to my career specialty.  I graduated from all training courses with satisfactory ratings or higher.  The issue for which my discharge was given primarily dealt with my conduct and behavior while off duty as opposed to my on-duty performance which was exemplary.  I believe the problems I incurred were due to my immaturity.

I respectfully request that my discharge be changed/upgraded so that I may attempt to re-enlist in another branch of the Armed Forces.  I fell that I did not get ample opportunity to serve my country and I believe if given the chance, I would excel at any task assigned in whatever branch of the military that I may enter.”

Documentation

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

Training Certificate dtd 1 June 01
Eligibility Certificate dtd 19 Jan 01
Training Certificate dtd 18 Jan 01
Marine Corps Institute Certificates (6)
Training Certificate dtd 14 May 97
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		950814 - 951210	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  951211		Date of Discharge:  980824

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  02  08  14
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  67

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.9 (9)		Conduct:  3.5 (9)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.2.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

971112:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  UA from 0700 until 1700 on 971029.  
	Award:  Forfeiture of $244.00 per month for 1 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  Not appealed.

980106:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to qualify with t/o weapon.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980106:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Operating a vehicle after consuming alcohol.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980617:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121 (1 Spec):  SNM made illegal phone calls during the period 980222 through 980420. Violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey order by Cpl J_.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $519.00 per month for 2 month(s), reduction to E-2.  Not appealed.

980625:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Uttering worthless checks to MWR amount totaling 967.50.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $463.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  Not appealed.

980720:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

980720:  	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.

980721:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.  The factual basis for this recommendation was the Applicant’s infractions of the UCMJ to include larceny, disobedience to a lawful order, and uttering worthless checks.   

980731:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

980810:	GCMCA [CG MCB Kaneohe Bay] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980824 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  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 (D and E).

Issue 1.   The Applicant contends that he served the United States faithfully and honorably.  When the service of a member of U.S. Marine Corps has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge 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 three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86, 92, 121 and 134.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends that his problems in the Marine Corps can be attributed to his “immaturity.”  While he may feel that his immaturity was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief on this basis is denied.

Additionally, for the Applicant’s edification, an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 Jan 97 until Present. 

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article [ e.g., Article 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days].

C.  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.  

D.  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.

E.  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