Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00809
Original file (MD00-00809.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-2ndLt, USMCR
Docket No. MD00-00809

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000608, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing review. The applicant designated a civilian counsel as the 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 020101. 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 and reason for discharge shall not change. The discharge and reason for discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/Involuntary Discharge - Unacceptable Conduct (Board), authority: SECNAVINST 1920.6A.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. WHETHER A GENERAL DISCHARGE PROPERLY REFLECTS APPLICANT'S CHARACTER OF SERVICE DURING HIS 2½ YEARS OF SERVICE?

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
Verbatim Transcript of Board of Inquiry
Verbatim Transcript of Article 15 Proceedings
Results of JAGMAN

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR (Platoon Leaders Class (Naval Aviation)) 930120-960215

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Commission: 960216               Date of Discharge: 981231

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 10 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 16                        AFQT: N/A

 Highest Rank: 2ndLT

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

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: LOA

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/Invol Discharge - Unacceptable Conduct (Board), authority: SECNAVINST 1920.6A.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

971109:  Preliminary Inquiry Report: Recommended case be forwarded to SJA for further action and to NCIS/CID for investigation. Opine that in the best case that applicant conducted himself in a totally unprofessional manner in regard to dealings with LCpl W_ allowing the perception of a personal and sexual relationship with her, he lied to his company command, abused government property, fraternized, had sexual relationship with LCpl W_, and committed adultery with same.
971121:  Notification of Article 15, UCMJ, Hearing for violation of Article 134 (2 Specs- fraternization and adultery): Applicant advised of his rights and elected legal counsel, accepted NJP, and a personal appearance before the Commanding General.
980220:  CID Report regarding violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (adultery) and Article 134 (fraternization).
980313:  Violation of UCMJ, Article 134: fraternization; violation of 134: adultery. Applicant plead guilty on both and he was found guilty on both violations.
         Awarded: Punitive Letter of Reprimand.
980313:  Punitive Letter of Reprimand issued to applicant

 980313:  Applicant desired to submit a request for resignation in lieu of administrative separation processing.

980317:  Applicant acknowledgment of right to appeal Letter of Reprimand, but elected not to appeal the Letter of Reprimand and elected not to make a statement.

980318:  Report of NJP to from CG, 2d FSSG, to CMC via CG, II MEF recommended applicant request resignation with a General (under honorable conditions) discharge be approved and did not recommend that applicant be required to show cause for retention in the Marine Corps at a Board of Inquiry.

980526:  Commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Atlantic recommends to CMC that the applicant should appear before a Board of Inquiry.

980729:  Board of Inquiry, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed the said allegations, and recommend he be separated with a characterization of service as general under honorable condition.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 981231 with a General (under honorable conditions) by reason of unacceptable conduct with board action. (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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 considering the applicant’s issue, the Board found the discharge awarded, General (under honorable conditions), is in fact, proper and equitable. Relief denied.

The extensive verbatim transcripts and records available to the Board reinforced the Board’s decision by confirming that the applicant knowingly and willfully transgressed not only the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but also the code of personal conduct incumbent upon Marine Corps officers and which contributes to good order and discipline in naval service.

The Board extends sympathy to the applicant’s father, whose loyalties to his son and to the United States Marine Corps were heedlessly put in competition by the actions of the applicant. The Board also extends its sympathies to the applicant’s former spouse whose trust was betrayed, and to ex-Private H_W_ whose Marine Corps career was prematurely terminated by an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge, as a direct result of the applicant’s actions.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides that a discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must be found to have existed during the period of service in question. No such error or injustice is evident in the applicant’s service records.

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6A of 21 Nov 1983 (Administrative Separation of Officers), establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 15 Oct 81.

B. Chapter 4, Paragraph 4102 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E, effective 18 Aug 1995), PROCESSING FOR SEPARATION

C. 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.

D 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.

E. 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 | MD03-00848

    Original file (MD03-00848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed the Board first conducts a record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00751

    Original file (MD01-00751.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's representative requested that the reason for separation be change to "Secretarial Authority". Dear members of the board: The following issues are the reasons my discharge should be upgraded from a general discharge to an honorable discharge. Additionally, advised applicant is submitting a letter of resignation and requested leave awaiting separation.990730: Applicant tendered a resignation of commission in lieu of processing for administrative separation for cause,...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01118

    Original file (MD99-01118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    990511: Commanding Officer, MATSG, recommended that the Show Cause Authority convene and Administrative Separation Board, stating: "While the applicant's Navy's Chain of command supports his retention, "I do not", and recommended convening a board to appropriately characterize the applicant's discharge.990615: CMC recommended to the SECNAV that applicant be discharged with a General (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00080

    Original file (ND02-00080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    910814: CO, NAVHOSP Portsmouth, reported Applicant's NJP to BUPERS.910719: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of substandard performance of duty and misconduct due to the commission of serious offenses as evidenced by CO's NJP on 18 Jun 91 and the characterization of service may be under other than honorable conditions.910722: Applicant advised of her rights and having elected having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected the right...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01090

    Original file (MD03-01090.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 19990129 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for unacceptable conduct (A and B). 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01030

    Original file (MD99-01030.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500419

    Original file (MD0500419.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By unanimous vote, the BOI recommended that that Applicant be separated from the naval service for the reasons listed above and the service be characterized as other than honorable.020211: Applicant’s request 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 (B and C).The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because the Board of Inquiry (BOI), which...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01305

    Original file (MD02-01305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ]010628: Commanding Officer, Basic School, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, VA, recommended Applicant's retention in lieu of separation for misconduct due to civilian conviction of two counts of indecent exposure and failing to demonstrate acceptable qualities of leadership required of an officer in his grade when he lied to a police officer. 011015: CG, Training and Education Command, recommended Applicant be administratively separated as a probationary officer and his...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501120

    Original file (MD0501120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. This letter and supporting documentation is my personal request for a review of my discharge issued by the United States Marine Corps, though the Secretary of the Navy, on 15 October 2003. While 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01359

    Original file (MD03-01359.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “Resigned.” The Applicant requests a documentary record review. ]011210: CG, I MEF, forwarded the NJP report to the Commandant, Marine Corps, concurring with the recommendation that Applicant not be required to show case for retention, but disagreed the with recommendation that Applicant be discharged with an Honorable, but...