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

 , ex-LCpl, USMCR
Docket No. MD03-01434

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030903.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to hardship.  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 20040526.  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 and narrative reason of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “The discharge is improper because this Applicant has submitted for a hardship discharge during the period of hardship.  The hardship discharge application was submitted on 9/30/01 to MAG 49, Willow Grove.  On 12/10/01, a letter of discharge was received, which was dated for 26 Nov 2001 (Under Other Than Honorable).”
The reason a hardship discharge was submitted was because the wife, at the time, abandoned our daughter and sought out an attorney to get a divorce and relinquish her rights over the child.  For this reason, this Applicant was unable to attend the scheduled drills.  The resources for childcare were unavailable, due to the former wife taking of all the funds.  She also managed to take the family car, which left us without transportation.  This Applicant managed to work a deal with the school that this Applicant was attending at the time.  They allowed this Applicant to work part-time for the school, while allowing this Applicant’s child to be present at the work place.  
This Applicant pray the honorable members of the Board to review the contents of the submitted documents.  These are the letters that accompanied the original application for a hardship discharge.”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Discharge notification
Letter from K_ B_
Letter from Mr. and Mrs. R. C_ H_
Letter from Rev. M_ B_
Letter from G_ S_ B_
Letter from M_ H. B_, Esq.
Letter from B_ F_, MSW
Letter from Applicant’s sister
Letter from Applicant’s sister
Letter from Applicant’s parents
Letter from Applicant’s brother
Letter from Applicant requesting hardship discharge (3 pp.)
Résumé
Criminal record check
Child abuse history clearance
Certificate of appreciation
DD Form 214
List of references 

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:  950712		Date of Discharge:  011210

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  03  02
	Inactive:  05  01  27

Age at Entry:  24			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  14			AFQT:  84

Highest Rank:  Cpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  NMF*			Conduct:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No Marks Found in the service record

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE; authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

951022:	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.

981205:	Acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Sergeant due to placement on the remedial PT program.

990630:	Acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Sergeant due to unsatisfactory participation.

010208:	Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested.  Applicant receipted for the package but failed to acknowledge the contents.  The failure to acknowledge official certified mail constitutes acknowledgement and waiver of all rights (MARCORSEPMAN par. 6303).

010306:	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 that Applicant has been an unsatisfactory drill status since 000108, missing a total of 51 scheduled drills.

011126:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.  

011126:	GCMCA [Commander, MFR] 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 20011210 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 his failure to participate in his reserve unit drills.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  Administrative separation for misconduct takes precedence over a possible separation for other reasons.  While he may feel that his responsibility as a single parent was a factor that contributed to his actions, the evidence of record and documentation provided for review 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.

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.  Paragraph 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95. 

B.  Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, MCO P1001R.1, Chapter 3, Reserve Participation and Administrative Procedures, paragraph 300.

C.  Table 6‑1 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95, Guide for Characterization of Service.

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