Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00813
Original file (MD03-00813.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00813

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030402. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests 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 20040312. 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 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 stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “My main issue is getting my discharge upgraded from an other than honorable to honorable. I know I made some mistakes and I feel that I have paid for them. Since I have been discharged I have had two children. I know when they ask why I was discharged, I will not be proud of the answer. I know all I will be able to tell them is that I am sorry for the events that occurred and that I hop they can learn through my mistakes.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                980227 - 980525  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980526               Date of Discharge: 010629

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 01 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 70

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.4 (7)                       Conduct: 4.0 (7)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, MUC

 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 :

990729:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121:
 Specification: Wrongfully appropriate a vehicle, the property of LCpl on 0800, 990515-0700, 990517.
Awarded forfeiture of $251.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Forfeiture suspended for 3 months. No indication of appeal.
990730:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Conduct which caused you to be brought up on UCMJ charges the week of 990726.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
000125:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to obey Article 86 for violations under the UCMJ.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
010111:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to successfully complete a prescribed inpatient care program for alcohol rehabilitation. You were dropped from the above named treatment on 001211.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
010122:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
 Specification: Failure to obey motor transport standard operating procedures, failure to drive defensively and failure to inspect the area before making a turn on 001224.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 107:
Specification: Falsifying official statements on government document Standard Form 91 (accident report form). Applicant lied about how the accident occurred on 001224.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 108:
Specification: Purposely and willfully driving a government vehicle into a ditch causing damage to it. The estimated cost of the damage to the vehicle is $4500 on 1545, 001224.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 134:
Specification: Willful disregard to government property, blatantly disregarding the motor transport standard operating procedures, it was unbecoming of a Marine and behavior caused great discredit to the Armed Forces on 001224.
Awarded forfeiture of $584.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to PFC. Not appealed.
010507:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121:
 Specification: Steal two (2) gameboy video games, military property, of a value of $49.98, the property of the 29 Palms Exchange on 1100, 020410.
Awarded forfeiture of $521.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to Pvt. Not appealed.
010507:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
010511:  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.

010511:  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 pattern of misconduct. This pattern was established with your first NJP you received on 990729 for violating article 121, your second NJP you received on 010122 for violating articles 108, 107, 92, 134, and your third NJP for violating article 121.

010525:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

010604:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 1 st Marine Division (Rein)] 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 20010629 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. 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 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 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 92, disobey a lawful order; Article 107, false official statements; Article 108, destruction of government property; Article 121, larceny; and Article 134, conduct unbecoming.
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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501071

    Original file (ND0501071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-01071 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050614. The Applicant requests the Discharge 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:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant’s Representative, dtd June 7,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500558

    Original file (ND0500558.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: None were submitted PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: 901228 – 910820 (DEP) COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900821 Date of Discharge: 930317 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 06 27 Inactive: 00 07 23 No indication of appeal in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00898

    Original file (MD04-00898.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00851

    Original file (ND00-00851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The next day I was sent to a Court Martial, which resulted in 30 days in brig and $600 x 2 for the ammo and did not discharge me at that time. The next day I was sent to a Court Martial, which resulted in 30 days in brig and $600 x 2 for the ammo and did not discharge me at that time. I want a personal hearing on this matter.” The NDRB found no impropriety or inequity in the applicant’s discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00299

    Original file (MD02-00299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00299 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary Review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 970819: Applicant, having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27b, requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801205

    Original file (MD0801205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: NONE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Record of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900416

    Original file (ND0900416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB reviews discharges on a case-by-case basis and no evidence can be found in the Applicant’s service record to support his statement. The NDRB is not reviewing other service member’s misconduct or administrative or disciplinary actions against them. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00937

    Original file (ND02-00937.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant has not been convicted of any civilian charges prior to this administrative separation processing.010131: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 001208 due to continued misconduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider. 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:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801732

    Original file (MD0801732.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The record of evidence clearly shows the Applicant’s service record meets the requirement for a pattern of misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00830

    Original file (ND02-00830.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 910929 - 910708 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910709 Date of Discharge: 930121 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 01 06 13 Inactive: None Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4 Education...