Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00931
Original file (MD99-00931.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Cpl, USMC
Docket No. MD99-00931

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990629, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000410. 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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Expiration of Enlistment (USMC) EOS, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1005.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. I have no additional documentation. I served honorably and was discharged based on prejudice of command. I was blamed for all my drug addict husband wrong doings. I was not given any credit for my years of honorable service. I gave a big part of my life to the military. They in turn gave me nothing. I worked and earned even strike and award that I had. I worked for a prejudice command at 2d FSSG Camp Lejuene. A thorough review by the board would see that such a discharge was not warranted. I had no way to stop him from coming on base. I had no counseling as to where I could receive any type of help. All they wanted was me out of the military because I was a black female.

 Documentation
Only the military service and medical records were considered, as the applicant did not provide any additional documentation.
PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              820129 - 860126  HON
                                             790413 - 820128  HON
                                             750416 - 790412  HON
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                741017 - 750415  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 860127               Date of Discharge: 900919

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 07 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 32                          Years Contracted: 3 (14 months total extensions)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 96

 Highest Rank: SSgt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages : All performance reports were available to the Board for review.

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MM(3), GCM(4), LOA(2), OR, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Expiration of Enlistment (USMC) EOS, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1005.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

860127:  Reenlisted for term of three years at HQHQRON MCAS Tustin, CA.

 860613:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance [failure to conform to weight control/military appearance standards]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

861006:  Removed from weight control/distribution program.

880330:  Counseled for deficiencies [inability to maintain Military appearance weight standards]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

880719:  Removed from weight control/distribution program due to medical (pregnancy).

881128:  Assigned to duties as CMCC SNCOIC because of an overage of 0193's assigned to MACG-18. While CMCC duties were performed in a highly creditable manner, applicant demonstrated marginal competence in preparing general correspondence. This coupled with her assignment to the weight control program did not instill in her seniors in her MOS the necessary confidence for an assignment as an Administrative Chief of an Operational Squadron. For this reason, applicant not recommended for reenlistment , instead, a 12 month extension. Applicant chose not to make a statement.

890127:  Extended enlistment for one month.

890227:  Extended enlistment for twelve months.

 890515:  Counseled for deficiencies [failure to maintain Marine Corps weight standard on 4 separate occasions]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

890523:  Counseled for deficiencies [documented financial irresponsibility, specifically, uttering a worthless personal check to the MCX in the amount of $54.95, and a letter of indebtedness from Miki Furniture Company, of Okinawa, Japan in the amount of $644.00]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued. Applicant declined to make a statement.

890911:  Counseled for deficiencies [continued financial irresponsibility, specifically, uttering a worthless personal check to the MCX in the amount of $50.00]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued. Applicant declined to make a statement.

891204:  Counseled for deficiencies [financial mismanagement as demonstrated by numerous bad checks and failure to pay your just financial obligations, in a proper and timely manner, resulting in debt complaints to the command]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued. Applicant chose to make a statement.


900221:  Counseled that she would not be recommended for extension/reenlistment due to 18 month history of bad checks, debt failure, and failure to meet weight standards despite extensive counseling command attention concerning these deficiencies. Member refused to sign .

900223:  Counseled concerning the following: Although granted a 30 day extension to all processing of request for a six month extension, the request forwarded recommending disapproval. Advised to take all steps necessary to complete outprocessing for discharge by 26 March 1990. Sources of assistance provided. Was afforded opportunity to make a statement. Applicant desired to make a written statement.

900225:  Counseled for continued financial mismanagement, as demonstrated by failure to pay just financial obligations, resulting in debt complaints to this command. Further counseled concerning failure to report birth of a child on 890126. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued. Applicant chose to make a statement.

 900227:  Extended enlistment for one month.

 900816:  Counseled for deficiencies [failure to maintain Marine Corps height and weight standards and financial irresponsibility. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
900822:  Special Court-Martial
 Charge I: violation of the UCMJ 123A, 2 Specs: uttering worthless checks
Findings: to Charge I and specifications 1 and 2 - guilty but guilty of lesser included offense, Article 134
Sentence: Reduction to paygrade E-4
CA 900918: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
900919:  Interviewed applicant and advised her that she is not recommended for reenlistment because of Special Court Martial and has been assigned reenlistment code of RE-4 and has been informed of this action.
900919:  Applicant discharge with a general under honorable conditions by reason of expiration of enlistment.
PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900919with a general under honorable conditions due to expiration of enlistment (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).

In the applicant’s issue, the Board found that the applicant was denied reenlistment because of her history of writing bad checks, debt failure, failure to consistently meet height and weight standards, and her Special Court-Martial. The applicant was not discharged for the actions of her husband, as she alleges. The applicant’s service during this period of enlistment was clearly not honorably. Relief denied.



Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION , 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     

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00490

    Original file (MD99-00490.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 930624: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct (alcohol dependence, personality disorder, and history of behavioral problems). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 931007 under honorable conditions (general) due to alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure (A).

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01315

    Original file (MD02-01315.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01315 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020911, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.950927: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did absent yourself without authority by securing from duty at 1000, 950727 and did not return until 0730, 950728;...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01136

    Original file (MD02-01136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Continued involvement with civilian and military authorities, specifically, failure to maintain sufficient funds in checking account and failure to pay owed bills in a timely manner. Counseled concerning deficiencies: malingering, disobeying a lawful order, making false statements. 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).The Applicant introduced no...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601023

    Original file (MD0601023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-LCPL, USMCMD06-01023Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060725Narrative Reason for Separation: MISCONDUCT Character of Service:Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN PARA 6210.2Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: MALS-12 IWAKUNI JAPANApplicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTEDCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: NONE Decision: Date of Decision:20070608 The Discharge shall : GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700072

    Original file (MD0700072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Board determined that the Applicant’s post service record of conduct did not justify upgrading the characterization of his service during the active duty enlistment in question. SJA review (date): Separation Authority (date): NOT FOUND IN RECORD Basis for discharge directed: NOT FOUND IN RECORDCharacterization directed: NOT FOUND IN RECORD Date Applicant Discharged: 19990114 Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardTotal Number of Pages: 6 Related to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00221

    Original file (MD00-00221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: Failed to be at appointed place of duty on 1630, 3Feb98. The factual basis for this recommendation was applicant's violations of the UCMJ to include unauthorized absence, making and uttering false checks (thirteen offenses), dishonorable failure to pay a debt and failure of the Marine Corps weight control program. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00571

    Original file (MD02-00571.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the record of trial (the Naval Discharge Review Board was unable to get the service record), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Service Related Documents (16) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 920110 - 920324 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00424

    Original file (MD02-00424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Not appealed.000120: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: Failed to obey MCO 4600.40 by using an issued government credit card for unofficial business and withdrawing funds of unnecessary items in the amount of $210.24 on 27Aug99, 30Aug99, 6 and 7 Sep99.Violation of UCMJ, Article 107:Specification: Make a false statement to SgtMaj regarding an issued government credit card on 23Nov99.Violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Specification: Driving under the influence on 19Jan00.Awarded...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00793

    Original file (MD99-00793.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00793 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990520, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority and change RE code to RE-1. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued970514: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134:Specification: Utter checks of worthless value and failing to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00694

    Original file (MD00-00694.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your performance to date has been unsatisfactory, and you have failed to meet both your monthly weight reduction goals and Marine Corps weight control standards.] In response to issue 2, the Board found no such Marine Corps Directive in relation to the circumstances of the applicant’s case which would have resulted in a medical discharge.In response to issue 3, the Board found that the applicant had received counseling for drinking and driving, inability to maintain funds to cover personal...