Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00672
Original file (MD01-00672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SGT, USMC
Docket No. MD01-00672

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010411, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed Veterans of Foreign Wars as his representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter the applicant was informed that he was at the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area. Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010928. 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 – Commission of a serious offense (all other) with admin discharge board, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues
 1.To the Directorate: Discharge Review Board:
 This statement is being submitted in regards to my present discharge that was administered on the 29th of April 1986, I am requesting a review of my records and character in regards to an up-grade of the same. Since my discharge from the United States Marine Corps, I have the time and experiences to atone for the nature of the serious offence in which I was arrested for and subsequently discharged for in 1986, since that time, I have enabled myself to see formal education at the Pittsbugh Institute of Mortuary Science in which have persued my career in assisting families in their time of need and also lecturing to the community on specific issues related to health personal safety, and moral values in the Funeral Services.
I am submitting this brief as of this date being that I have waited this long of a period so that I may submit to the Board a "track record" per se in regards to my involvment in my community, such as the veterans organizations that I am active in, always striving to promote the health and welfare of a veteran, his wife and family as needed, and also assisting the State Director of Funeral Director and Embalmers for the State of Arizona in regards to rules and regulations adherent to Firms and Funeral Directors so that proper attention under the law will not be compromised to any family in their time of need, I also work with hospice patients both young and old alike to overcome there pain and suffering from the disease they medically diagnosed will never fully recover.
I am also involved in other events that Also counsels the bereaved and also the misguided who need the right direction shown to them and to be on the road to recovery, all this aside, I feel that what was reflected in 1986 and what I am submitting 15 years later should be a testomonial of the progress I have made since my untimely departure from the military service. I do not drink nor do I advocate it, especially DUI's to anyone and especially to our children and adolescents, I also feel that by not re-offending with any local authority, however, working with them in partnership to deter crime and create a better living atmosphere for all concerned. As a Licensed Funeral Director for the State of Arizona, I am submitting this brief for your review and respectfully request of an up-grade of Honorable Discharge from the United States Marine Corps.
2. We ask that in addition to the applicants issue you consider his many years of post service accomplishment and that you change the discharge as requested. He appear to have overcome his lapse in judgement.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Statement of Issues
Resume (2pgs)
Copy of Honorable Discharge Certificate
Copy of Certificates of Good Conduct (2)
Copy of Meritorious Mast Certificates (4)
Photograph of SGT S___ and SGT F___ presenting colors
Copy of Distinguished Service Award
Copy of Certificate of Appreciation from American Legion
Letter of Appreciation from Pennsylvania Funeral Directors Association (2)
Letters of Recommendation (2)
Copy of Certificate of Training (Mobile Morgue Training Program)
Copy of Certificate of Membership (National Foundation of Mortuary Care)
Copy of Arizona Homicide Investigators Association Certificate
Thank You Letter from M___ J. B___ Member of Assembly
Letter of Appreciation from K___ K___ & family
Employee Thank You Letter from Mrs R___ F. A_____
Thank You Letters (10)
Copy of Court Order Dismissing Accusation

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              790326 - 820425  HON
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                780705 - 790325  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 820426               Date of Discharge: 860429

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 00 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 50

 Highest Rank: SGT

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): All enlisted performance reports were available to the Board for review.

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, Pistol Sharpshooter Badge, Meritorious Mast(4 th ), GCMw1*

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct-Commission of a serious offense (all other) with admin discharge board, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

820426:  Reenlisted at 2D SUPNA, 2D FSSG (REIN) CAMLEJ, NC for 4 years.

 850320:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did on or about 850318, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Morning Physical Training Formation.
 Awarded forfeiture of $261.00 per month for 1 month ($161.00 suspended for 6 months), restriction for 14 days (suspended for 6 months). Not appealed.
850729:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Did on or about 0655, 850710 knowingly and willfully disobey a lawful order issued by SSGT W___ R. D____ to wit: to attend Company Physical Training at 0655, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Did on or about 1630, 850709 knowingly and willfully disobey a lawful order issued by SSGT W___ R. D____ to wit: to report to the Company First Sergeant to clear being absent from Company Physical Training at 0655 on 850710, violation of UCMJ Article 111: Did on or about 850603 operate a vehicle, to wit: a passenger car, while drunk.
         Award: Forfeiture of $243.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 14 days (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
860106:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [Concerning my conviction on 850708 while driving under the influence of alcohol and having driving privileges revoked for a period of 12 months aboard MCB, CAMP PENDLETON, CA]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

860110:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [Concerning leadership principles and the responsibilities of a Marine NCO]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

860110:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failed to go to appointed place of duty morning physical training at 0730, 851220.
         Award: Forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), restriction for 14 days (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
xxxxxx:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
860130:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
860130:  Commanding Officer, Headquarters and Service Battalion 1 st Force Service Support Group recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The factual basis for this recommendation was your involvement of a discreditable nature with civilian authorities as evidenced by commission of a serious offense to wit: having driven a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to another, did unlawfully fail to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of an accident.

860318:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

860415:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

860416:  Commanding Officer, 1 st Force Service Support Group, FMF Camp Pendleton, CA directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 860429 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (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).

Issues 1 and 2. The applicant requested an upgrade based on his post-service conduct and accomplishments. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service conduct, 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 that provides that an unfavorable 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 enlistment in question. No such error or injustice is evident in the applicant’s service record. In determining whether a case merits a change based on post-service conduct, the NDRB considers the length of time since discharge, the applicant's record of community service, employment, conduct, educational achievements, and family relationships. 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 less than Honorable discharge. The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. The applicant should have produced documentation of community service that extend beyond the service he renders for pay as a funeral director and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, in addition to the documents he provided in order for consideration for relief based on post-service conduct. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 6210 MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16C), Change 2, effective 15 Apr 84 until 28 Jul 87.

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 134, fleeing the scene of an accident.
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 “ afls10.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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01046

    Original file (ND03-01046.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 19930210 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00059

    Original file (ND01-00059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Assessment: ETOH Plan: Return to counseling for re-evaluation 8 hrs.850304: Sick Call: Pt is a 20 year old white male complaint of alcohol ingestion. No indication of appeal in the record.860308: CO, USS HECTOR advised CNMPC that applicant received another NJP and the recommendation for discharge due to misconduct due to Commission of serious offense submitted on 28 Feb 86 is appropriate and that the discharge package be corrected as such and correct the date in the LON, para 7 to show...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00935

    Original file (ND99-00935.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 Letter from G.A. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560), Change 10/85, effective 16 Dec 85 until 05 Oct 86, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00276

    Original file (MD01-00276.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regards, (P_ B_ (Applicant)) Appealed on 860828 but denied.860821: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [poor attitude as shown by continual questioning of authority lack of initiative and professional misconduct reflect in exaggeration of excuses and statement made by you]. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00574

    Original file (MD03-00574.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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).A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Marine. The Board found that the positive aspects of the Applicant’s record, the personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00477

    Original file (MD00-00477.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am very sorry I am not able to continue my service in the Marine Corps. 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 response to the applicant’s issue wherein he states that he would “like my records to reflect honorable service”, the Board found the applicant had been counseled for misconduct as an NCO. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00729

    Original file (ND00-00729.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 Enlisted Performance Evaluation Report Copy of First Endorsement to Letter of Appreciation Copy of Letter of Appreciation PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 830110 - 831204 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 831205 Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01000

    Original file (MD04-01000.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The NDRB is authorized, however, 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. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00336

    Original file (ND01-00336.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010710. 830729: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (You have been identified as a drug abuser through urinalysis screening/awarded NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for a drug related offense), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. Unfortunately the applicant had only 15 years from the date of his discharge to request...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00682

    Original file (ND00-00682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 850710 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct pattern frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities (A). 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...