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

 ex-2ndLT, USMCR
Docket No. MD03-01090

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030604.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant listed the American Legion as his representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040429.  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)/INVOLUNTARY DISCHARGE (UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT), authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 4102 and SECNAVINST 1920.6A.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  No laws were broken to warrant lesser discharge. (UCMJ)
 2.   Action occurred during class environment.
 3.   Satisfactory performance rates an Honorable Discharge.
 4.  Applicant is applying to another branch of service to complete the last 10 years of military service.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (AMERICAN LEGION):

“5.  (Equity Issue)  This former member finally requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1) Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (3)
Character reference, dated Oct 26, 1998
Character reference, dated Oct 27, 1998
Character reference, dated Sep 30, 1998
Character reference, dated Oct 11, 1998
Character reference, dated Oct 11, 1998
Letter of Appreciation, dated Mar 14, 1991

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

Active:   USAF		850124 - 850214	ELS
Active:   USMC		861205 - 910614	HON
	Active:   USMCR		970127 - 970403	HON
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		861118 - 861204	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970404		Date of Discharge:  990129

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  09  26
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  30			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			

Highest Rank:  2nd LT

Final Officer Performance Evaluation Averages:

Proficiency:  NMF*			Conduct:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  COA, LOA (3), GCM, NDSM, SSDR, 
SWASM (w/1*)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No Marks Found

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/INVOLUNTARY DISCHARGE (UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT), authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 4102.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

981028:	A Board of Inquiry, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant failed to demonstrate acceptable qualities of leadership, had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, and false official statement, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions.)

981117:	GCMCA [CG, MCCDC] concurred with the board’s recommendation for discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions.)

Applicant’s service record is incomplete.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990129 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for unacceptable conduct (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 1-3:  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  A characterization of general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Marine.  The Applicant’s service was marred by unacceptable leadership, commission of a serious offense, and making a false official statement.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.  

Issue 4:  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.  However, 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 during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.   

Issue 5:  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.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.  The Applicant did not submit any documentation to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.  Relief denied.

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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence relating 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.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6A (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS) effective 21 Nov 1983 until 12 Dec 1999 establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 15 Oct 81.

B.  Chapter 4, Paragraph 4102 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E, effective 18 Aug 1995), PROCESSING FOR SEPARATION

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