Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. MD99-01058

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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD99-01058

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990723, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested 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 000720.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/INVOL DIS (BOARD) (MISCONDUCT) SERIOUS MIL/CIV OFFENSE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read:  “INVOL DIS (BOARD) (MISCONDUCT) SERIOUS MIL/CIV OFFENSE” vice “MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I feel that the punishment I recieved, (reduction to Private, loss of pay, and 30 days in the brig) was - punishment enough.  I never had any problems before this incident, nor any thereafter. I served with Marines who beat thier wives, shoplifted, and broke & entered, these Marines got "Slapped on the Wrist" compared to the punishment I received.  And, although no one wanted to admit it their crimes were "macho" compared with mine.  This characterization of my service (OTH) has, since I left the USMC been a constant struggle, in terms of finding employment and other matters.  I ask you to please upgrade it to honorable.  Respectfully submitted,

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: USMCR(J)		910124 - 910512	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910513		Date of Discharge:  941028

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  05  16
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  26			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  59

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.1 (10)			Conduct:  3.6 (10)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/INVOL DIS (BOARD) (MISCONDUCT) SERIOUS MIL/CIV OFFENSE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

931005:	Special Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specifications):
	Specification 1: Willfully and wrongfully expose in an indecent manner to public view his penis.
	Specification 2: Wrongfully commit an indecent act by taking into his mouth and sucking on another's penis, licking his buttocks.
	Findings:  to Charge I and specifications thereunder, guilty.  
	Sentence:  Fine of $300.00, confinement for 30 days, reduction to Pvt.
	CA 931228: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

931005:	To confinement.

931029:	From confinement.

940120:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Conviction at a SPCM on 931005 for wrongfully committing an indecent act of a nature to bring discredit upon the Armed Forces and the United States Marine Corps.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 941028 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (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).

The applicant believes that his confinement and reduction were sufficient punishment for the crime.  The Board disagrees.  The applicant was found guilty at a Special Court-Martial of violation of Article 134, UCMJ, committing indecent acts.  His discharge was appropriate for the misconduct.  Relief denied.

The applicant wants his discharge upgraded to assist him in finding employment.  The Board does not upgrade discharges solely to assist the applicant in getting employment.  Relief denied.          
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, Misconduct The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95. 

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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

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
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington, D.C.  20374-5023

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX:  A6730/A9233/A9453/A9237/A9225/A9217