Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00197
Original file (MD02-00197.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00197

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020102, 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. Subsequent to the application, the applicant obtained representation from the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 021008. 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. 6210.6.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues, as submitted

1. (Equity Issue) His violation of the UCMJ notwithstanding, this former member proffers that his overall service record which included two prior honorable enlistments is sufficient to warrant a fully honorable separation.

2. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Forty-four pages from applicant's service record
Copy of registration forms for Sampson Community College dated August 16, 2001 and November 14, 2001
Copy of lab report

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                930827 - 940815  COG
         Active: USMC              940816 - 980115  HON
                  USMC             980116 - 000928  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 000929               Date of Discharge: 010130

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 04 02
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 40

 Highest Rank: Sgt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages: Applicant provided performance reports.

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NMCAM, GCM (2), SSDR (3), NDSM, AFSM, NATO, MM, Letter of Appreciation (3)

 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. 6210.6.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

001128:  Copy of Criminal Investigation Report found in case folder.

001222:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 121:
         Specification: Larceny of 20,000 Yen.
         Finding: to Charge I and the specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $1062.00, restriction for 60 days, reduced to Cpl.
         CA action 001222: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

001222:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
001228:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted 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.

001229:  Commanding Officer 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 a summary court-martial on 22 December 2000, in which applicant was found guilty and convicted of a serious offense committed against a Japanese national on 20 October 2000, while on liberty at Naha City, Okinawa, Japan. Applicant demonstrated disorderly conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the Armed Forces and a total lack of disregard of the accepted standards of conduct expected of a United States Marine. Additionally, the lack of sincere desire to abide by and adhere to the rules and regulations that govern a Marine clearly demonstrates that he has no potential for further military service.

010112:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

010118:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 3d Marine Division] 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 010130 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).

Issue 1. The Board found that the applicant’s overall record of service is not sufficient to mitigate his misconduct. 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. T he applicant’s service was marred by his Summary Court-Martial for the commission of a serious offense. Despite this being only a one time offense during the final enlistment, 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 the naval service. An upgrade would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

Issue 2. 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, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence that the applicant is drug free, are examples of verifiable documentation 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. Relief not warranted.

The applicant 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 31 January 1997 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 121. larceny.
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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00601

    Original file (MD04-00601.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition. If processing is based solely upon...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00185

    Original file (MD04-00185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. _________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition. This case is now...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00201

    Original file (MD01-00201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00201 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The record shows the applicant was UA from the Marine Corps over 12 years.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00918

    Original file (MD99-00918.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000310. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 961101 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A and B). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00516

    Original file (MD04-00516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DRAFT DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-LCpl, USMC Docket No. The only change from MCO P1900.16C is: “administrative” vice “admin”) GKQ1 Misconduct-Commission of a serious offense (all other) with administrative discharge boardHKQ1 Misconduct- Commission of a serious offense (all other) administrative discharge board required but waived For SPD Codes GKD1, Misconduct-Absent without leave (with administrative discharge board)...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01058

    Original file (MD99-01058.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01058 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990723, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Board does not upgrade discharges solely to assist the applicant in getting employment.

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00112

    Original file (MD00-00112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 3 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 28 Highest Rank: Cpl Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Proficiency: N/A Conduct: N/A Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None Days of Unauthorized Absence: 4725 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE /Misconduct-Absent without leave (admin discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00965

    Original file (MD99-00965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read: “Commission of a serious offense – all other (board required but waived” vice “Commission of a serious offense – all other (with board)”. Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 971118: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00297

    Original file (MD04-00297.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. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00127

    Original file (MD03-00127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00127 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021025, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to secretarial authority. Issues, as submitted Whether Applicant’s psychiatric conditions so contributed to his alleged misconduct that an administrative separation board for misconduct was inappropriate.2. 910215: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a...