Author: CAP
Last saved by: janet.goode
Company: NCPB

Docket No. MD06-00803

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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD06-00803

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060523.  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 did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070322.  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 by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Applicant Issues

The Applicant claims she was untreated for medical problems and should have been discharged based on her medical condition.

The Applicant is claiming post service equity as reason for a discharge upgrade to honorable.

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) front page, (Member 1) back page
Discharge Letter from Commander, USMC, MCB Quantico, Virginia, dtd May 2, 2005
Pre-separation Counseling Check List, dtd April 4, 2005
Medical Documents (68 pgs) 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USMCR (DEP)	20040324 - 20041112	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20041113		Date of Discharge:  20050506

Length of Service (years, months, days):

Active:    00  05  24  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  61 days
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  23

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  16				AFQT:  93

Highest Rank:  PFC				MOS:  9900/8911

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.3 (1) 			Conduct:  2.2 (2)

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

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

050408:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did on or about 050120, without authority, absent herself from her unit to wit: School of Infantry, Training Command, Camp Lejeune, NC and did remain so until on or about 050322.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction for 60 days, reduction to E-1.  Not appealed.

050408:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  The factual basis for this recommendation was your failure to adapt to the Marine Corps environment as evidenced by your period of UA from SOI, TrngCmd, CamLej, NC from 050120 to 050322.  Applicant informed the least favorable character of service possible was under other than honorable conditions.

050408:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

050412:	Commanding Officer recommended Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

050412:	Commanding Officer, Security Battalion forwarded recommendation for Applicant’s involuntary separation for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, with a characterization of under other than honorable conditions.

050425:	GCMCA, Commander directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20050506 by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  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 claims she was untreated for medical problems and should have been discharged based on her medical condition.  When reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline.  The NDRB generally does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition, the implied non diagnosis, nor the implied lack of medical treatment given to the Applicant to be of sufficient nature to exculpate the Applicant’s misconduct.  In fact, the NDRB sees no connection between the Applicant’s misconduct and her medical condition.  The Applicant was diagnosed with diabetes after she was discharged.  Relief is not warranted.  

The Applicant is claiming post service equity as reason for a discharge upgrade to honorable.  The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  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 Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.  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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge.  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 01 September 2001 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 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days.

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

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

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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