Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01257
Original file (MD03-01257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01257

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030717. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20040430. 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 – Pattern of misconduct (administrative discharge board required but waived), 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 discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident which should have been deemed understandable considering my age at the time.”


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):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                900419 - 900624  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900625               Date of Discharge: 920904

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 02 10 (does not exclude lost time)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 6

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 56

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.3 (6)                       Conduct: 4.0 (6)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, CAR, NDSM, KLM, SASM w/ 2 stars, NUC

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 18

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct (administrative discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.3.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

911014:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Financial irresponsible; make/endorser of personal checks with insufficient funds in your account.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

 911024:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 123a (2 specs):
 Specification 1: At Camp Pendleton, wrongfully and unlawfully utter a series of checks.
Specification 2: At Okinawa, wrongfully and unlawfully utter a series of checks.
Awarded forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Not appealed.
920128:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (1 spec):
 Specification 1: UA 0631, 920112 to 2106, 920116
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Susp forfeiture for 3 mos. Not appealed.
920514:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (1 spec):
 Specification 1: UA 1300, 920429 to 1130, 920511.
Article 89 (1 spec):
Specification 1: On or about 2100 on 6 May 92 behaved himself with disrespect toward Cpl M_ a Non-Commissioned Officer by saying (Tell those mother fucker I aint ever coming back) or words to that effect.
 Awarded reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $440.00 per month for 2 month, restriction and extra duties for 45 days. Not appealed.
920702:  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 three nonjudicial punishments for violation of various articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
920702:  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.

920725:  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 3 nonjudicial punishments for violation of various articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

920818:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

920824:  GCMCA [CG, 1 st MarDiv] 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 19920904 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 contends that his discharge was based on one incident. In fact, his discharge was based on a pattern of misconduct. As such, that included 3 NJP’s for violations of Articles 86, 89 and 123a of the UCMJ. While he may feel that his age was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief on this basis is denied.

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. There is no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge. The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented. Therefore, relief is denied.

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. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time. 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 P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95.

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, Articles 86, Unauthorized Absence and 89, Disrespect.
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 | 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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-01318

    Original file (MD02-01318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00822

    Original file (MD01-00822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890829: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0701, 18Aug89 to 0645, 21Aug89 (2 days). The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. The applicant did not provide any documentation to warrant an...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00277

    Original file (MD01-00277.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00277 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010103, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion associated with his discharge at the time of its issuance, and that his rights were...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01030

    Original file (MD02-01030.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Not appealed.921202: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00348

    Original file (MD04-00348.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. The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct-Pattern of misconduct (with administrative discharge board), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 930923: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00174

    Original file (ND00-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00174 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 950221: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 29Nov94 due to continued misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00849

    Original file (ND04-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00849 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040427. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00427

    Original file (MD04-00427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:“Discover-e” Certification Applicant’s resume PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None HON Inactive: USMCR (J) 890710 - 891226 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00818

    Original file (MD00-00818.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    900221: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134:Specification: Make 14 checks for a total of $1741.73, without sufficient funds to cover the checks. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must...