Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00242
Original file (MD02-00242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00242

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020114, 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 applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020815. 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. Discharged in absentia.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues, as submitted

1. To Whom it may concern
I joined the Marines in 99 and had been discharged 2001 on an OTH I'm asking for another chance to serve our country. At the time I was young and wasn't ready to be a man. Many events since then had changed. I fully realize I made a mistake that resulted in my leave. I am asking that I may receive another chance to prove to myself, my daughters, my mother and to serve this country not only for myself but if we shall God forbid have to once again fight for our freedom that I can help insure my daughters future has the freedom she deserves. Sincerely yours

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                990522 - 990523  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990524               Date of Discharge: 010511

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 11 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.7 (3)                       Conduct: 3.7 (3)

 Military Decorations: Rifle Marksman Badge

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 508

 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 :

991122:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0626, 22Nov99.

991218:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0115, 18Dec99 (25 days/surrendered).

000114:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 1200, 14Jan00.

000125:  Applicant arrested on the charges of aggravated assault and recklessly endangering another person in Lebanon, PA. Applicant currently in the hands of civil authorities.

001213:  Civil court in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania found applicant guilty of aggravated assault. Sentence: Fine $1000.00, and incarcerated in the Lebanon County Correctional Facility for an indeterminate period, the minimum of which shall be eleven and one-half months and the maximum of which shall be twenty-three months.

010313:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
010313:  Applicant advised of 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.

010327:  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 the commission of aggravated assault and recklessly endangering another person.

010430:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

010502:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base Hawaii] 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 010511, in absentia, 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 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. 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. Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. 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. 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 128, assault; Article 134, disorderly conduct.
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 | MD03-01462

    Original file (MD03-01462.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01462 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030909. c. Offenses involving drug abuse shall be processed for separation by reason of the appropriate drug abuse offense in paragraph 6210.5, as well as, other applicable reason in this Manual. Counseling per paragraph 6105 is not required for processing a Marine for separation under this paragraph, unless the Marine is processed under paragraph 6210.2 or 6210.3.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00540

    Original file (ND02-00540.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00540 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020314, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 911126 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal...

  • 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 | ND01-00512

    Original file (ND01-00512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to scheduling a personal appearance hearing. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620. Dear Sir: I am taking this time to write to you and ask you to review my case and upgrade my discharge, from General under honorable conditions to Honorable Discharge.The reason I was discharged...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00101

    Original file (MD02-00101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020620. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 870107 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A and 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00257

    Original file (MD04-00257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00257 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031121. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and that the RE Code be changed. 001010: 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 evidenced by arrest for financial identity fraud and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00888

    Original file (MD04-00888.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01087

    Original file (ND99-01087.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: Unauthorized absence from 9Jul90 to 14AUG90 (36 days). 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 the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant claims he successfully completed the first 4 years of his enlistment and because he was not transferred to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00003

    Original file (ND01-00003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Drug History: Denies any previous use. 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’s issue states: “I was discharged appx 3 months after serving 45 days/ 45 days restricted duty 1/2 months pay for 2 months and reduction in rate from an E-5 to an E-1 this was the first offense I was charged with which I was found guilty. I feel with these...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00131

    Original file (MD04-00131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested 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:Issue 1: “My discharge states that I was discharged because of a commission of a serious offense based on my arrest by civilian authorities on 910426 for criminal conspiracy. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...