Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01124
Original file (MD03-01124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01124

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030612. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to service injury. The Applicant requests a personal appearance before a traveling panel closest to Nashville, TN. The Applicant was informed that a documentary review is conducted prior to a personal appearance hearing. The Applicant listed W_ J. D_ from the Department of Veteran Affairs as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040415. 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 and narrative reason 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. Overall service not given due consideration

2. Should have been put before medical board for service incurred injury and separated w severance pay or placed on limited duty til separation.

3. Denial of due process”
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)                980814 - 990531  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990601               Date of Discharge: 011109

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17 (Parental consent)                       Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 66

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.6 (8)                       Conduct: 3.5 (8)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

 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 :

990323:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Steal a bivy sack from Battalion Supply and failure to be at appointed place of duty.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
001003:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: On or about 1115, 000908 was disrespectful in language toward Cpl P_.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 Specs): Specification 1: Disobeyed order to assist in cleaning and maintenance of the barracks; Specification 2:
Disobeyed order to report for counseling.
Awarded forfeiture of $273.00, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Not appealed.
001223:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespectful to NCO by saying “I heard you the first time” and rolling his eyes.
 Awarded forfeiture of $273.00 (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Not appealed.
010420:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to be at place of duty on 0600, 010313; Violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Steal a bivy sack from battalion supply.
 Awarded forfeiture of $607.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to PFC. Not appealed.
010820:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by continuous violation of the UCMJ, violation of Article 91, insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer on 001020 and 001003.
010820:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
010822:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Pattern of misconduct.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
010822:  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 continuous violation of the UCMJ.

011016:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

011022:  GCMCA [CG, 1 st MARDIV (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 20011109 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. 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 three occasions 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 or under honorable characterization of service. No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.
Relief denied.

 Issues 2-3. Separation for misconduct takes precedence over possible separation for other reasons. The Board’s regulations limit its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. The Board found that the Applicant was afforded all rights regarding his administrative separation. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. 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. 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 91, disrespect to a NCO; Article 92, disobey a lawful order; and 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 | MD04-00213

    Original file (MD04-00213.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00213 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031117. 011023: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. While the NDRB respects the fact that the Applicant tried, his service is equitably characterized as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00155

    Original file (ND04-00155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.011027: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of marijuana.Award: Forfeiture of $717.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00902

    Original file (ND03-00902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00812

    Original file (MD03-00812.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. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :000328: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeyed lawful order from SSgt K_ not to drive his vehicle while his license was suspended.Awarded forfeiture of $273.00, restriction and extra duties for 14 days (all suspended...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01122

    Original file (MD01-01122.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I would like for you to please consider my request for an upgrade of discharge from other than honorable 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: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 900215 - 900528 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900529 Date of Discharge:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00769

    Original file (MD00-00769.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-PVT, USMC Docket No. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant (4pgs) Reference Letters (3) Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 870828 - 880726 COG Period of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00445

    Original file (MD00-00445.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct (admin discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 850129: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Between 841015 and 841204 you have demonstrated a pattern of conduct which is detrimental to the good order and discipline of Marines.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00301

    Original file (MD04-00301.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation The Applicant did not submit any additional documentation for the Board to consider. Specification 2: … having received a lawful order from … known … to be a Non-Commissioned Officer … did willfully disobey the same.Violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs):Specification 1: … having knowledge of a lawful order … failed to obey the same by wrongfully driving on base. Recommendations: … (Applicant) should be administratively discharged per paragraph 6210.3 of the MARCORSEPMAN …

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00482

    Original file (MD01-00482.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CA 950222: Sentence is approved and ordered executed (but execution of that portion of the sentence adjudging forfeiture of $395 pay per month for 1 month is suspended for a period of 6 months, at which time unless sooner vacated, the suspended portion of the sentence will be remitted without further action).950222: To confinement.950318: Returned to full duty.950405: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01152

    Original file (MD03-01152.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: Inactive: USMCR(J) 970620 - 980614 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980615 Date of Discharge: 010601 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 11 17 Inactive: None Chronological Listing of Significant Service...