Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01121
Original file (MD01-01121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD01-01121

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010821, 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020417. 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:
None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                930924 - 940118  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940119               Date of Discharge: 960206

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 02 01 18
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 49
Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency: 3.8 (6)                       Conduct: 3.8 (6)

 Military Decorations: Rifle expert badge
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, Letter of Appreciation, MM

 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 :

941031:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Repeated willful and wrongful failure to follow lawful orders and directions from your immediate seniors, repeated willful and wrongful failure to be at your appointed place of duty, unwillingness to accept responsibility for the above deficiencies, immature and inappropriate approach to solving personal problems, lack of integrity, and self-centered attitude.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
950317:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty, SOI Legal Officer, dereliction of duty, morning open up for SOI Legal, and willful disobedience of NCO.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
950705:  Applicant arrested. Charged with PC 415(1), challenging or fighting in a public place and PC 417(a)(1), exhibiting a deadly weapon, other than a fire arm, in a rude or threatening manner.
950925:  Applicant convicted in civil court of reduced to an infraction.
         Sentence: Fined $50.00, mandatory anger management class, ordered not to violate same or similar offense, not to have any contact with victim or victims family.
951020:  Summary Court-Martial.
          Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
          Specification: Fail to go at time prescribed to Orthopedic Dept at 1400, 22May95.
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92:
          Specification: Fail to obey the same by wrongfully borrowing a shirt and a pair of shoes from PFC, a SOI student on 1May95.
         Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 121:
         Specification: Wrongfully appropriate one short sleeve shirt, value of $25.00, a pair of Nike shoes, value of $50.00 between 1Apr95 and 23May95.
         Charge IV: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134:
         Specification: With intent to defraud, falsely pretend to Navy Exchange Service Command that SSgt did sign the said LCpl Navy Exchange Service Command Card app and by means thereof did wrongfully obtain from Navy Exchange Service command services of a value of $750.00, to wit: a credit account with the Navy Exchange Service Command.
         Finding: to Charge I-IV and the specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $569.00, reduced to Pvt.
         CA action 951101: The finding of guilty on Charge I and specification thereunder is disapproved. Sentence approved and ordered executed.

951227:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
951227:  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.
951227:  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 was applicant's recurring incidents of failing to go to his appointed place of duty, fraternizing with students here at the School of Infantry, and falsifying documents. His intolerable actions over the course of the past twelve months have resulted in two page 11 counselings and a summary court-martial. By his persistent flouting of military authority, rules, and regulations, applicant has demonstrated that he is incapable of honorable military service in the Marine Corps.
960117:  Assistant Chief of Staff, SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.
960129:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton] 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 960206 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).
Issue 1. The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.
A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. T he applicant’s service was marred by award of a summary court-martial on one occasion and adverse counseling entries that could have resulted in non-judicial punishment on other occasions. 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 characterization of service. An upgrade would be inappropriate. Relief denied.
The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 leaving the service. However, 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. 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.

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. 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 86, unauthorized absence; Article 92, failure to obey regulations; Article 121, larceny; Article 134, intent to defraud.
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

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01167

    Original file (MD01-01167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was then screened as unfit for the PRP.940505: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: Violate CoO P5000.6, chap 17, par 170002.2 by being a minor in possession by consumption of an alcoholic beverage.Awarded forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to PFC. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.950419: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00885

    Original file (MD00-00885.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00885 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000706, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from J____ J. M______ Attorney at Law Copy of Service...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00458

    Original file (FD2006-00458.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AB) (HGH AMN) 1. (No appeal) (No mitigation) 26 Jul 01, RAF Lakenheath, UK - Article 121.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01064

    Original file (MD04-01064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During 5 months at the SOI, Camp Pendleton, CA, the Applicant’s service was marred by 3 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (a total of 51 days UA), 91, 92, and 113 of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00943

    Original file (MD04-00943.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 for the Board to consider. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00250

    Original file (MD00-00250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.980120: Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the promotion period Jan/Feb/Mar 98 because of assigned to weight control program.980123: Vacate suspended forfeiture of $205.00 for 2 months and restriction and extra duty for 30 days awarded at CO's NJP dated 21Aug97. After a thorough review of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00257

    Original file (MD01-00257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found, in a three to two decision, that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. Additionally, the applicant was arrested three times for DUI during this period of enlistment, and those alcohol-related offenses were the subject of several adverse counseling entries. In determining whether...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500999

    Original file (MD0500999.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington DC. ), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.920828: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: In that SNM,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00199

    Original file (MD04-00199.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Thanks in advance for your thoughtful consideration.” Documentation In addition to the service record (there was NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of Time Sheet from Morgan County CommissionHandwritten Listing of ReferencesCopies of DD Form 214 (2) Copy of Discharge Accountability Summary...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00901

    Original file (MD01-00901.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Not appealed.860530: Vacate forfeiture of $167.00 awarded at CO's NJP of 24Feb86.860710: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 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 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days; Article 90, disobeying a lawful order of a commissioned...