Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00613
Original file (MD00-00613.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00613

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000414, 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 001026. 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)/Physical disability, with severance pay, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 8404.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. I DO NOT KNOW WHY I WASN'T GIVEN AN HONORABLE DISCHARGE IF YOU CAN'T CHANGE PLEASE INFORM ME WHY NOT.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Medical report from Camp Lejune NC dtd
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                890824 - 900611  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900612               Date of Discharge: 920928

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 17 (Doesn't exclude lost time)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 49

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.21 (7)             Conduct: 4.17 (7)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, SWASM(w/3 Bronze stars)

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 7

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Physical disability, with severance pay, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 8401.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910904:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: on or about 0700, 910812, without authority, absent himself from his unit and did remain so absent until on or about 0700, 910819 (7 days UA); Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: on or about 910819, having knowledge of a lawful order, given to him, to return form leave at 0630,910812, fail to obey the same by not returning from leave.
 Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and
extra duties for 14days. Not appealed.
920317:  Counseled concerning alcohol related incident, specifically, past pattern of misconduct involving alcohol with the most recent incident occurring on 24 Feb 92. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

920311:  Medical Board, Naval Hospital Camp Lejeune, NC: Diagnosis: Patellofemoral Syndrome, Bilateral Knees, Left Great Than Right, DNEPTE. Pt did not submit rebuttal to the Medical Board findings. Referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).

920421:  The applicant was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of April because of poor attitude and severe lack of motivation.

920424:  Counseled concerning poor military appearance and bearing, not in accordance with Marine Corps standards, while working at Morehead City Port. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

920513:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: unauthorized absence from 1200, 920420 to 1320, 920420; Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: disobedience of a lawful written order, BO1020.8u by wearing an earring.
         Award: Forfeiture of $213 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920724:  PEB, acting for the Secretary of the Navy, requested applicant discharge be effected by reason of physical disability with severance pay but without further disability benefits, under provisions of 10 U.S.C. 1203 or 1206, as appropriate. Applicant was awarded 10% disability.
920908:  CMC directed applicant's discharge. Awarded 10% under VA code 5099-5003.
920909:  Counseled to obey the restrictions of your Medical Board limited duty chit dated 15 Jun 92, i.e., no physical activities. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

920921:  The applicant was informed by his commanding officer that he was recommended but not eligible for reenlistment because of his failure to conform to physical standards and that he would be assigned a reenlistment code of RE-3P upon separation.
PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920928 under Honorable conditions (General) due to physical disability with severance pay (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).

Issue1. The Board determined this is not a decisional issue. The applicant requests the Board inform him of the reason why his discharge was not upgraded. The applicant had NJP for 7 days unauthorized absence, he was counseled for an alcohol incident and poor performance, then had a second NJP for not being at his place of duty and wearing an earring. The Board determined the even though the applicant had Pro/Con marks that warrant an Honorable discharge, his misconduct out weighed his creditable service. His under Honorable conditions (General) discharge accurately reflects the quality of his military service. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 8401, DISABILITY DISCHARGE WITH SEVERANCE PAY , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16C, effective 27 June 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 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 | 2003_Marine | MD03-01029

    Original file (MD03-01029.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01029 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030522. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00894

    Original file (MD99-00894.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00894 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990619, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Pt reports he has been having thoughts of suicide for 1 weeks, no definite plan. (D and E).The applicant’s military service did not contain at least three minor disciplinary infractions required for processing.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00559

    Original file (MD01-00559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-PFC, USMC Docket No. 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 and his representative submitted the following as an issue: “ (Equity Issue) As evidenced by his supporting documentation and testimony, this former member opines that his post-service...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00895

    Original file (MD99-00895.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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found the applicant was discharged for drug use, which required administrative separation from the Marine Corps. He was discharged for drugs, not performance. No documentation has been provided to the Board.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01139

    Original file (MD02-01139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01139 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020806, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Risks and benefits have been explained to him and he wishes to proceed with an open stabilization procedures.991029: Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune, Medical Board diagnosed Applicant with Right Shoulder Instability, recommended eight months of limited duty. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00812

    Original file (MD02-00812.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    940103: Commanding Officer, H&HS MCAS Tustin CA recommended to separa-tion authority that Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 940207: GCMCA (Commander, Marine Corps Air Bases, Western Area) directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01318

    Original file (MD02-01318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01318 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020910, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00637

    Original file (MD00-00637.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :871221: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.880223: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91:Specification:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00471

    Original file (MD01-00471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00471 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable . Body fat 28%.930707: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP on 23Apr93. The Board found that the applicant was discharged for his unsatisfactory performance while on weight control.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00147

    Original file (MD01-00147.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief is therefore denied.The applicant also appealed for relief based on post-service conduct, however, failed to provide any proof or documentation of credible service to the community. The applicant provided the Board only a copy of his DD-214. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.