Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01234
Original file (MD02-01234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD02-01234

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020826, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a Traveling Panel. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgment letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing and also advised that the NDRB does not travel, all hearings are held in Washington National Capital Region.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030602. 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. 6210.2.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

 1. I joined the Marine Corps because of what I wished to accomplish with my life, and because I wanted to serve, and fight for, my country. When my fiancé left me, my Marine Corps life went down the drain. Since my discharge, I have spent every waking moment wishing I was still a Marine, and every moment asleep dreaming of the day I could be a Marine again. I love my country, and I wish to continue serving her, and I love my Marine Corps, and I won’t be truly happy till I am reunited with it.

Before the fallout of my fiancé and I, I was awarded a Meritorious Mast, a Navy Unit Citation, and was a rifle & pistol expert.

Currently, I and my friends march in step, call cadences, yell Semper Fi & Ooh-Rah! at the top of our lungs, and motivate each other to do our best. Well, my best can only be achieved when I am allowed to rejoin my beloved Marine Corps. I will do whatever it takes to be welcomed back to my Corps, and I hope & pray that you can help me to live my dream.

Finally, I wish to tell you about a poster. A poster within my bedroom that bears the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima. Underneath it says “The Strength To Persist, The Courage To Endure.” I’ve endured a lot, and am courageous, but I am also strong, which is why I persist at rejoining the Marine Corps. Thank you for listening to me. May God Bless America.

Semper Fidelis (A_ D. B_ (Applicant))


 Documentation
Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                970409 - 970901  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970902               Date of Discharge: 991217

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 80

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.0 (5)              Conduct: 3.7 (5)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MM, NUC, Rifle Expert Badge, Pistol Expert Badge

Days of Unauthorized Absence: UA – 6 days, Civilian Confinement - 42 days

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.2.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

980212:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [By not meeting the minimum required score (2.65) on the instrumental audition, Applicant is not currently eligible for promotion]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided.
980415:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0001, 980413 to 2200, 980413; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by SSgt G_ not to drive his POV to Michigan, an order which it was his duty to obey, fail to obey the same by wrongfully driving his POV to Michigan.
 Awarded reduction in pay grade to E-1, restriction and extra duties for 9 days. Not appealed.
980416:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [On 980415 found guilty at NJP for disobeying a lawful order, and unauthorized absence]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
981014:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [Failure to obey rules and regulations of the UCMJ – specifically, violation of Article 86 on 980929, when Applicant departed a working party without being secured and was later found in the barracks in civilian attire]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
981112:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did, on board Camp Barrett, The Basic School, Quantico, VA, on or about 0645 to 0715, 981022, without authority, fail to go to the Guard Shack, his appointed place of duty; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Did, on or about 2030, 981007, fail to obey lawful General Order NO. 2, while on duty, he was caught sitting down with his 782 gear off and his weapon benched; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Did, on or about 0045, 981026, fail to obey lawful General Order No. 2, while on duty, he was caught sleeping in one of the vehicles located in the motor pool area.
         Award: Forfeiture of $428 per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days. Not appealed.

990115:  Vacated the forfeiture of $428 pay per month for 2 months imposed and suspended on 981112 NJP.

990115:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did, on board Camp Barrett, The Basic School, Quantico, VA, on or about 0805, 990113, without authority, absent himself from his place of duty at which he was required to be, to wit: The Basic School’s Armory, and did remain so absent until he was found sleeping in his room at 0830, 990113, by his section NCO Cpl C_.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

990614:  Applicant counseled that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion for the month of July 1999 because of recent NJP.

991102:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Having the knowledge of a lawful written order, BnO 11101.3F issued by the Commanding Officer of The Basic School, an order which it was his duty to obey, did on or about 1730, 991021, have in his possession one switchblade knife.
         Award: Restriction for 30 days. Not appealed.
991105:  Incarcerated in civilian Stafford County Detention Center for breaking and entering, grand larceny, credit card theft and petty larceny. Trial date set for 10DEC99. [EXTRACTED FROM FIRST ENDORSEMENT LTR OF 8NOV99 ON RECOMMENDATION OF DISCHARGE ACTION and the DATE OF DETENTION EXTRACTED FROM APPLICANT’S DD 214.]
991108:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions as evidenced by three Company level and one Battalion level non-judicial punishment, and three page 11, 6105 counseling entries.
991108:  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.

991108:  Commanding Officer, Headquarters and Service Company, Quantico, VA, recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions. The factual basis for this recommendation was three Company level non-judicial punishments, one Battalion level non-judicial punishment and the arrest by the Stafford County Sheriff’s department on two separate occasions during October and November 1999, charged with breaking and entering, grand larceny, credit card theft and petty larceny; currently incarcerated in the Stafford County Detention Center with trial date set for 10 December 1999.

991202:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

991206:  GCMCA [CG, MCCDC, Quantico, VA] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 991217 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions (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. 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 award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions, civilian arrests and adverse counseling entries on other occasions. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the 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 inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. T he 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. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. 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 Jan 97 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 a lawful general order.
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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00403

    Original file (ND99-00403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT – Commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). 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 did not provide any documentation to support her...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-01064

    Original file (MD00-01064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION It is for the reason listed above that we feel the character of separation given should be upgraded to honorable based on his mental conditions. mental health diagnosis is not an issue upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00507

    Original file (MD99-00507.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 910708 - 920705 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920706 Date of Discharge: 950803 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 00 28 Inactive: None 950720: GCMCA [Commander, Marine...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01050

    Original file (ND01-01050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01050 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010807, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990630 - 990706 COG Period of Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00492

    Original file (MD03-00492.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 wording is also incorrect, written in the wrong form, written as “you are” instead of “I was” (Please see #6 Administrative Remarks (1070)G) The entries are also class matters and do not reflect activities at my Command 4 th FIIU, Buckley ANGB, Aurora CO.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00679

    Original file (MD04-00679.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00679 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040315. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces, nor can reenlistment serve as a basis for which the Board grants relief.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01029

    Original file (MD03-01029.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01029 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030522. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00494

    Original file (MD03-00494.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Texas Department of Public Safety employment requirements (3 pages) Applicant’s driver license Jailer license, issued April 5, 2001 Applicant’s social security card PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 970829 - 970914 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00946

    Original file (ND99-00946.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980413: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of entry level performance and conduct - failure to adapt to the Military environment. 980715: CO, FLEASWTRACEN, San Diego advised BUPERS that applicant was discharged on 13 March 1998 [DD 214 states discharge date of 15 Apr 98] with an uncharacterized discharge by reason of entry level performance and conduct - failure to adapt to the military environment. The applicant’s discharge shall change to General Under...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00147

    Original file (MD01-00147.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief is therefore denied.The applicant also appealed for relief based on post-service conduct, however, failed to provide any proof or documentation of credible service to the community. The applicant provided the Board only a copy of his DD-214. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.