Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00064
Original file (MD02-00064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMCR
Docket No. MD02-00064

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011004, 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 020529. 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/Failure to Participate (Reserve not on active duty) (administrative discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues
1. In my Service Record Book, counseling was stated for excessive absences. At that time I disclosed my location to be in Orlando FL, drilling actively in Orlando, FL. The CO's and I & I staff phone numbers were given to Greensboro N.C. Also when I returned to N.C. for AT duty in the summer of 1992 I was not told of any further discrepancies of drill attendances.

2. My Service Record Book did not arrive in Greensboro N.C. after I left 29 Palms CA.
During my service, I received the Good Conduct Medal, the top 10 percentile of my Electronics School, Commendations from my Capt. For extra duty as a Contact Team member for repairing complicated communication equipment. And volunteered service for Toys for Tots which was recorded by local TV stations. These are not the actions of a person who runs from his duties and responsibilities.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Separation Authority dtd 16 Feb 93
Service Record Page (Administrative Remarks)
Service Record Page (Chronological Record)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900322               Date of Discharge: 930223

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 01 27
         Inactive: 01 09 05

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 76

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.2 (9)              Conduct: 4.2 (9)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Marksmanship Badge, NDSM, LoA

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Failure to Participate (Reserve not on active duty) (administrative discharge board required but waived); authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6213.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

900321:  Enlistment contract into the USMCR documents acknowledgement of the requirement to participate in 48 scheduled drills and not less than 14 days of annual training per year for 6 years upon completion of initial active duty training.

900716:  Reported for Initial Active Duty for Training (IADT).

910912:  Released from IADT, having served 1 year, 1 month 27 days of active duty for training and received characterization of service as "Honorable".

920209:  Commanding officer notified the applicant of unsatisfactory drill participation via certified letter.

920209:  Eligible for but not recommended for promotion to E-4 due to excessive unauthorized absences. [Not available for signature.]

920209:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [unsatisfactory drill participation]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued. [Not available for signature.]

920316:  Letter of intent to administratively reduce for unsatisfactory drill participation sent via certified mail, return receipt requested, affording applicant an opportunity to make a statement. Applicant did not submit a statement.

920316:  Applicant administratively reduced to PFC due to unsatisfactory drill participation.

920711:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [unsatisfactory drill participation]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued. [Not available for signature.]

920712:  Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested. Applicant did not receipt for letter by return signature and failed to acknowledge the contents.

920712:  Sgt C_ , with Cpl W_ proceeded to PFC (Applicant)'s residence. Applicant not there, but talked with applicant's father. Father indicated that he would inform applicant of the information. Father advised that applicant now lived in Florida and Sgt C_ gave applicant's father the telephone number and ask him to advise son to get in touch with unit. The Notification Letter of administrative separation was unsigned.

921008:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "Efforts to instill a proper sense of urgency in this Marine have been numerous. Constant personal counseling as to directions that he should take to improve his situation have been presented. He has been offered the chance to call long distance collect calls to the Officer-in-Charge, so that this command could be informed of his personal situation and assist him in any way possible. All efforts to assist him have been in vain. The Marine seems to be unable to grasp the seriousness of his situation. For a short period of time he made up some of his absences, and even attended annual training. However, it was probably because - in his own words - he was running out of money, and soon thereafter started missing drills again. His squad leader and platoon sergeant have both been out to his residence to try and get him back to a good drilling status. Sergeant C_ attempted to delivery of the Notification of Separations Proceedings package with the results outlined in enclosure (6). The package was then mailed to SNM's last known address, and was even forwarded by the postal system t his address in Florida to no avail. SNM did not return it. The reason for the lateness of this package is that SNM contacted this command about making up drills in a Florida unit, so it was put on hold. Apparently that was not his real intent."

930211:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

930216:  GCMCA [CG, MRF] directed the applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930223 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve (A, B, and C). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D). 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 (E and F).

Issue 1. The Board found no documentation of the applicant attending drills at another SMCR unit during the period he was absent from his assigned unit. While the applicant claims that he was not notified of his discrepancies, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

Issue 2. The Board found that the applicant’s service record book location at any given time is not a mitigating factor in the applicant’s discharge. The Board found that the applicant’s achievements while in the reserves did not sufficiently mitigate his unsatisfactory participation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. 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 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 950817) states that a Marine may be separated for unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve under criteria established in MCO P10014.1.

B. Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, MCO P10014.1.

C. Table 6-1, Guide for Characterization of Service, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 950817).

D. 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.

E. 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.

F. 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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-00644

    Original file (MD02-00644.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as submitted Prior to the documentary discharge review, the Applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 920210: Commanding officer notified the Applicant of unsatisfactory drill participation via certified letter. 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 (E and F).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00640

    Original file (MD03-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/ under honorable conditions. Documentation Only the Applicant’s service and medical records were reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 940909: Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00946

    Original file (MD04-00946.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. th TkBn, 4 th MarDiv, Broken Arrow, OK, mailed the Notification of Separation Proceedings, Acknowledgement of Rights form, and the Purpose and Scope of the Navy Discharge Review Board and Board for Correction of Naval Records form, by certified mail # P 894 747 966, return receipt...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00563

    Original file (MD02-00563.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Upon returning to the United States, I was separated from active duty with an honorable discharge. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 for active duty period from 901215 to 910516 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): USAR 880227 - 890226 HON USMCR 811014 - 871013 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00702

    Original file (MD03-00702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“I assert two issues that warrant a hearing in this matter:I. I feel that my discharge was unfair and should be upgraded because the characterization of “under other than honorable” does not accurately describe my character of service in that I serve a period of active duty, received an Honorable Discharge from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00133

    Original file (MD04-00133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00133 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031023. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Relief cannot be granted under these circumstances by this Board.The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00891

    Original file (MD00-00891.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00891 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000707, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. My Characterization of Service is, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions and the Separation Code is HSG1 - (Failure to Participate - Reserve not on active duty). 981015: GCMCA [Commander, Marine Forces Reserve] directed the applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00350

    Original file (MD04-00350.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00350 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031218. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. First Sargeant M_ stated that my commanding officer should have been informed of the incident so that he could address the issue.

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00449

    Original file (MD00-00449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00449 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 940323: Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01502

    Original file (MD03-01502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated:1. I firmly believe that once a Marine Always a Marine. It was the duties back at the Reserve Unit were the problems remained.