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


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY


ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD06-00633

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060406. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant designated a veteran’s service officer as his representative on the DD Form 293 .

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060830 . After a thorough review of the available 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 Honorable Conditions (General) by reason of homosexual admission.

---

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s Statement, as stated from an attached letter to the Board:

“Dear Naval Council of Personnel Boards,

I am writing you to correct my discharge from the United States Marine Corps. On August 06, 2004, I received a General (under honorable conditions) Discharge from the United States Marine Corps. I obtained this discharge for the reason of homosexual admission. This information is incorrect, and I respectfully request that my discharge be upgraded to “Honorable” status. The first semester of my senior year in High School (Fall 2002), I decided to join the Marines, and did so through the local recruiting officer visiting the school. I was very excited and proud of my decision, as was my family and most of my friends. This decision did not come frivolously, as I weighed all of my options before coming to this conclusion. A strong desire to serve my country and the possibility of doing so while participating in the proud honor and tradition of the United States Marine Corps helped influence the outcome. I entered the Corps on 10/15/03, and began my Basic Training at the Marine Depot in San Diego, Ca. Though difficult, Boot Camp only increased my desire to be a Marine. Shortly into my training, I realized I had made the right decision. I knew that this was where I wanted to be, and who I wanted to be, so I committed myself to the Corps. I was a good Marine. Upon completing Boot Camp & Infantry Training in California, I shipped to Virginia to complete my Security Force Training, then on to my final assignment in Maryland. Less than 10 months after passing through the gates of the Depot, I had advanced to the rank of Lance Corporal, and planned on continuing to advance my rank as far as my abilities would take me. The Marine Corps was my life. Upon graduating from Security Force Training, I was assigned to permanent duty station at Patuxent River, Maryland. Patuxent River has a Marine Security Force Company consisting of about 70 Marines assigned to guard duty. The moment I arrived in Maryland, it seemed as though this was not the Marine Corps I had trained with, and had come to love. We were subjected to unusually excessive hazing from the moment we got in the vans to transport us to base. However, I did expect that these were motivational tactics, and part of the standard indoctrination for all new Pax River transfers. I reluctantly resigned myself to it. The hazing did not stop upon our arrival at the Base, but instead, escalated. During the first several days at Pax River, I barely managed to steal 5 hours of sleep. I assumed this to be more sleep deprivation training. In the Marine tradition of holding itself to a higher standard, the rigorous schedule of 12-hour duty shifts set up by command, was exactly what I had expected. Unfortunately, the sleep deprivation and unrelenting hazing I was experiencing with my comrades fostered an uneasy, and somewhat volatile situation, where disputes over inconsequential things would erupt. I felt this environment was compromising our duty responsibilities, and contributing to an overall unsafe atmosphere everywhere on base.
I also determined there was not much interaction or communication between Command and the Marines standing post, which allowed for unapproved conduct to go unchecked. For the Marines who had been on base for extended periods of time, duty responsibilities were very routine and boring. This monotony, combined with the abusive environment fostered by the senior Marines on base, created very stressful conditions for everyone. Consequently, Marines were anxious for reassignment off the base or promotion. New transfers presented potential competition for promotion or re-assignment, and therefore became hazing targets for the entire company. Some hazing tactics consisted of schemes like quick draw contests, and side arms manipulations that created a kind of modern Russian roulette game — all with live rounds of ammunition. Other methods involved carrying out brutal unprovoked attacks, or surprise assaults where knives would be pressed to the throats of new transfers and subordinates - frequently while they slept. Sometimes they would order Marines to walk the entire 12-hour post without sitting down. If a Marine stopped for any reason, a sandbag would be placed in his day-pack, which he would then be forced to wear. Marines were sometimes locked in wall lockers for no particular reason. Thefts were carried out via random searches of Marines’ vehicles. Items of value would be removed and retained, without recourse for retrieval by the owner. Though it seemed just about everyone was participating in some form of hazing, the most serious offenses of conduct unbecoming a Marine were being committed by the Sergeants of the Guard. The widespread nature and seriousness of the hazing, combined with the disassociation of Command, led to much of this activity being over-looked or “covered-up”, as needed. I discussed the situation at the base with my fellow “targets”. All were as unhappy & disillusioned with the circumstances as I was, but all were equally as petrified to take action against it. This was not what I was trained to understand the Marine Corps to be. I attempted to address these issues by proceeding up the chain of command with my concerns. It did not take me long to find out that they too were involved, as my attempts to address the problems, were rebuked by more severe and vicious hazing actions. The nature of the company was to keep everything down the Command chain, making it impossible for me to correct conditions. I felt grossly overwhelmed and was disappointed in what I believed the Marine Corps to be all about. I felt desperate, as everything for which I had worked so very hard and prided myself in, was gone. I began to break down both mentally and physically. I had been pushed too far towards what I knew was not right, and felt I could not change. I thought about the many ways in which I had been instructed to handle situations such as these, but none seemed to fit. I tried contacting my Recruiting Station N.C.O.I.C. to get any kind of advice. I also called my family whenever possible, and I tried talking to the chaplain — nothing helped. It was suggested that it would be in my best interest to remove myself from the base, and not cause more problems or get anyone in trouble. In my despair, I considered several avenues to accomplish this, but only one seemed to offer me the chance to leave, without incriminating any of my fellow Marines. I would have to perjure myself, and admit to being gay. I was told that this would definitely allow me to leave and allow everyone and everything in the company to remain unscarred. As this appeared to be my only recourse, I contacted my superior officer, and began the process that resulted in my General (under honorable conditions) Discharge from the United States Marine Corps.
During the exit interviewing process, I intimated some of the problems I had experienced while on base, to my interviewer. I believe that, based in part on that testimony, an investigation of conditions on the base was initiated, eventually resulting in court martial hearings for two of the company’s sergeants. I participated in those proceedings subsequent to my discharge. Unfortunately, this action did not completely correct the problems in the company. During my second trip to Norfolk for continued testimony, I met with several Marines stationed at Pax River. They informed me that a Marine whom I had become friends with, shot and killed himself. He had apparently been drinking heavily while on duty, celebrating his last day on post. Mimicking the hazing that he had been subject to. I hope that I have presented sufficient reason for you to correct my General Discharge to “Honorable” status. The action that resulted in misrepresenting myself as homosexual and ending my Marine career, was truly the act of a desperate person in what seemed to be a truly hopeless situation.

Sincerely,

[signed] D_ R. S_ (Applicant)

[Applicant’s Address & Phone Number]
[Applicant’s Email Address]”

Representative submitted no issues for consideration .

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Character Reference ltr from D_ N_, dtd October 11, 2005
Character Reference ltr from D_ L_, dtd October 15, 2005
Character Reference ltr from D_ P_, undated
Character Reference ltr from S_ N_, dtd October 12, 2005

---

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    20021105 – 20031014               COG
         Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 20031015             Date of Discharge: 20040806

Length of Service (years, months, days):

Active: 00 09 22
         Inactive: None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 19

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 71

Highest Rank: LCpl                                  MOS: 0311/8152

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency: NA*                  Conduct: NA*

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, Pistol Marksman Badge, National Defense Service Medal

*Not Available

---

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Discharge involuntarily - Homosexuality - Admission (administrative discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6207.3b(2).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

040525:  Briefed on the Marine Corps policy against hazing and its effect upon moral and good order and discipline.

040806:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of homosexual admission.

Service Record Book did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.

---

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20040806 by reason of homosexual admission (A ) with a service characterization of under honorable conditions (general). After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable ( B and C ). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs ( D ).

The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. In the Applicant’s case, in the absence of a complete discharge package and without credible and substantial evidence to refute the Board’s presumption, the Board invoked the presumption of regularity. Specifically, the Board presumed that the Applicant was properly notified of his Commanding Officer’s intent to administratively recommend the Applicant for separation, that the Applicant was afforded all rights which he elected at notification and that the Applicant’s discharge was directed by proper authority. Therefore, relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends that his discharge should be changed to honorable because he only admitted to homosexuality for the purpose of securing his discharge from the Marine Corps. The Applicant further contends that his discharge should be changed because he only admitted his homosexuality due to an alleged command environment. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, other than his uncorroborated statements, to support the contention that he did not admit to being a homosexual or that his service did not merit a general (under honorable conditions) character of service. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

---

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16F), effective
01 Sep 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6207, HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT.

B . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

C . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

D . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy    Council of Review Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023