Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01318
Original file (MD02-01318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-01318

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020910, 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 030722. 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, as submitted

 1. I (Applicant) made some mistakes while I was serving and I have learned from them. I am requesting a chance to show everyone that I am a better person and I would like to reenlist and serve 3 terms in the Armed services.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
One page from Applicant's service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                950105 - 950110  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950111               Date of Discharge: 961219

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 11 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 42

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.6 (5)                       Conduct: 3.5 (5)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 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 :

960223:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Substandard professional conduct and poor judgment, as evidenced by habitual tardiness and failure to be at the appointed place of duty.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
960521:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to meet and maintain Marine Corps Physical Standards as evidenced by failure to pass the PFT on 960517.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
960709:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs):
 Specification 1: Absent without authority from appointed place of duty on 2100, 960604 and 0600, 9606054, to wit: MALS-39 Barracks 2405 Duty Section musters.
Specification 2: Absent without authority from appointed place of duty on 0620 and 0700, 960605, to wit: MALS-39 Squadron Support Division Physical Training.
Awarded restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to PFC. Not appealed.
960724:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Poor judgment and financial irresponsibility as evidenced by notifications to the CO dated 960626 and 960627 by the MWR Financial Management Division for 6 dishonored checks totaling $185.00 and service charges totalling $150.00. Further transgressions of any kind will not be tolerated.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
960807:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs):
 Specification 1: Absence without authority from appointed place of duty on 1800-1905, 960723, to wit MALS-39 SDO, for extra duties muster.
Specification 2: Absence from appointed place of duty on 1500-1550, 960804, to wit: MALS-39 Barracks 2405 DNCO, for restriction muster.
Awarded restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to Pvt. Not appealed.
960920:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Absence without authority from appointed place of duty on 0900-0940, 960831, to wit: EPD.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs)
Specification 1: Drinking alcohol.
Specification 2: Wearing civilian clothes while on restriction.
Awarded restriction for 30 days. Not appealed.
961009:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
 Specification: Violate restriction by illegally cohabiting with a female in assigned room 217, Barracks 2405, from 960925 to 961002.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 107:
Specification: False official statement on 961006, to wit: that his wife was staying at a local hotel, when in fact wife has been staying in Room 217, Barracks 2405, aboard MCB, Camp Pendleton, CA from 960925 to 961002.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 123A:
Specification: Wrongfully and unlawfully utter eight worthless checks on or before 961002, with intent to defraud, in the amount of $260.00, knowingly not having sufficient funds for payments of said checks, in full, upon their presentment.
Awarded forfeiture of $437.00 per month for 2 months. Not appealed.
961015:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
961015:  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.

961015:  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 your three page 11 counsellings and four NJP's.

961122:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

961203:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing] 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 961219 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’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. 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. 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. 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.

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. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.
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 18 Aug 95 until 30 Jan 97.

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, disobeying a lawful order; Article 123a, worthless checks.
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_Navy | ND04-00069

    Original file (ND04-00069.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 In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940802 - 940815 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00218

    Original file (MD01-00218.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00218 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001211, requested that the characterization of service on the 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’s first issue states: “(Equity Issue) This former member avers that his character of service is too...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01125

    Original file (ND02-01125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990424 - 990527 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 990528 Date of Discharge: 011105 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 05 08 Inactive: None 011028: Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00251

    Original file (ND01-00251.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.931123: [USS SPARTANBURG COUNTY (LST-1192)] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.931123: 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01276

    Original file (MD02-01276.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01276 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020906, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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).A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00328

    Original file (MD01-00328.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 (3 copies) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 920201 - 930505 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 930506 Date of Discharge: 961120 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 03 06 15 Inactive: None Age at Entry: 19 Years...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00421

    Original file (ND03-00421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. As this time, the Applicant has not provide any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00850

    Original file (MD03-00850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00850 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030409. CA action 901009: Sentence approved and ordered executed.910103: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs):Specification 1: Absent from appointed place of duty from 0700, 901123 to 0700, 901124. Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Specification: Violate a lawful general order, to wit: providing alcohol to a Private, a person under age of 21.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01108

    Original file (ND01-01108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged in absentia on 000224 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00724

    Original file (ND01-00724.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION (DAV's Issue)After a review of the Former Service Member (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 contentions as set forth on the application by the appellant of an upgrade of his current Bad Conduct Discharge to that of Honorable. As the representative this service requests consideration be given to...