Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00090
Original file (MD00-00090.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00090

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991019, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before a traveling panel closest to Toledo, Oh. The applicant did not list representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he 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 000622. 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/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                940912 - 941114  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 941115               Date of Discharge: 980629

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 07 14
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 66

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

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

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, Meritorious Mast, SSDR, Rifle Marksmanship Badge

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

971203:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction in the performance of his duties by willfully failing to dispose of hazardous material in a proper manner as it was his duty to do, violation of UCMJ Article 108: willfully destroy, by dumping speedy dry material into a free product recovery well, military property of the United States.
         Award: Forfeiture of $505.00 per month for 2 months ($505.00 per month for 1 month suspended for 6 months), and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.

971208:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [On 971203 you were found guilty at NJP for Violation of Article 92, UCMJ: Dereliction in the performance of your duties by willfully failing to dispose of hazardous material in a proper manner as it was your duty to do and Violation of Article 108, UCMJ: Willfully destroy, by dumping speedy dry material into a free product recovery well, military property of the United States] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued

980206:  NJP imposed and suspended on 971203 for a period of 6 months is hereby vacated and the punishment is ordered executed.

980210:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA (AWOL) on or about 0600, 980202 and 0600, 980203 from bldg 286 for remedial PT.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.

980213:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [On 980210 you were found guilty at NJP for Violation of Article 86: on or about 0600, 980202 and 0600, 980203 you were UA (AWOL) from remedial PT] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued

980521:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA (AWOL), on or about 0600 on 980504, 1100 on 980505, 1100 on 980507, 1130 on 980512, 0600 on 980513, 1130 on 980514, and 1000 on 980515 from Bldg 286 remedial PT.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 2 months ($100.00 per month suspended for 6 months), and extra duty for 45 days. Not appealed.
980608:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and paragraph 6206.2 of the reference, by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties, specifically, for unwillingness to conform to height/weight standards; the primary reason being misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
980608:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

980608:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. The factual basis for this recommendation were his NJP’s held on 971203 for violation of Articles 92 and 108 of the UCMJ, 989210 for violation of Article 86, UCMJ, and 980521 for violation of Article 96, UCMJ.

980611:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

980612:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Force Service Support Group] directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980629 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until Present.

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 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      


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-01065

    Original file (MD00-01065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-01065 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000918, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. [Misconduct, for breaking restrictions and being UA on two occasions for sign in while on restricted status] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01070

    Original file (MD01-01070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of applicant's resume PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 940129 - 941011 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 941012 Date of Discharge: 980203 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 03 22 Inactive: None After a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00039

    Original file (MD02-00039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00039 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010926, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00629

    Original file (ND04-00629.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01099

    Original file (ND03-01099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant’s conduct and performance marks, which form the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflect his misconduct, and fall below that required for an honorable characterization of service. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".The names, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00217

    Original file (MD04-00217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :980903: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 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 decisional issues...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00713

    Original file (MD01-00713.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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’s first issue states: “My "other than honorable" discharge was not appropriate for the offenses I committed. I request my discharge be upgraded to General Under Honorable Conditions.” The NDRB found the applicant’s service record demonstrated a pattern of misconduct according to regulations. Relief is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01483

    Original file (MD03-01483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01483 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030909. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :950127: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0700, 950110 to 2030, 950119.Awarded forfeiture of $223.00 (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duties for 14 days.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00854

    Original file (ND02-00854.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00854 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020530, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 980210: Applicant apprehended by military authorities 1400, 980210.980210: Applicant from unauthorized absence 1800, 980210 (104 days/apprehended).980213: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 971020 due to continued misconduct.980213: Applicant reduced to SR. 980224: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00853

    Original file (ND04-00853.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980415 with a general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to drug abuse (A). As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.