Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01418
Original file (MD03-01418.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01418

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030827. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. The Applicant listed the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040608. 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

No issues were submitted by the Applicant.

 Issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion ):
1. “ Equity Issue: Based on our review of evidentiary record and on behalf of this former member, we request that the Board consider provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.”



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)                900201 - 910102  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910103               Date of Discharge: 930609

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 07
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 31

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.9 (5)                       Conduct: 3.9 (5)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

920206:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Fail to go at the time prescribed to the Camp Kinser Gym on 0730, 920205.
Awarded forfeiture of $205.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Forfeiture suspended for 6 months. Not appealed.
921118:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0830-1600, 921113.
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Not appealed.
930323:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
 Specification: Violate DepO P1513.1A, chap 2, para 2003.2d, by having 2 recruits wash the windows on his POV on 930314.
Awarded forfeiture of $233.00 per month for 1 month, extra duties for 14 days. Not appealed.
930406:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Disobeying a lawful written order.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
930423:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Unauthorized absence from remedial PT during the period 0630-0710, 930420.
Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 15 days, reduction to PFC. Reduction suspended for 6 months. Not appealed.
930428:  Vacate suspended reduction.

930503:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Fail to be at appointed place of duty at 0800, 930423, to wit: remedial PT.
Awarded reduction to Pvt. Not appealed.
930517:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
930519:  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.

930519:  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 Applicant’s five nonjudicial punishments conducted on 920206, 921118, 930323, 930423, and 930503, and his six page 11 entries.

930527:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

930613:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruit Depot/Eastern Recruiting Region, Parris Island, SC] 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 19930609 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 occurred 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. 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 be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the discharge sufficient to warrant an upgrade. 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 P1900.16D), 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, Article 86, unauthorized absence; and Article 92, disobey a lawful 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01175

    Original file (ND03-01175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 (C and D).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".The names, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00026

    Original file (ND03-00026.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900613 Date of Discharge: 930702 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 10 18 Inactive: 00 02 02 After a thorough review of the records, supporting...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00254

    Original file (MD01-00254.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In response to the applicant’s issue, there is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service. At this time, even though the applicant states that he has a job, his own place, etc., he has not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00392

    Original file (ND04-00392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition. No indication of appeal in the record.920723: Retention Warning from USS CONNOLY: Advised of deficiency (CO’s NJP’s of 920413 and 920613) notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00733

    Original file (ND99-00733.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.17C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application. 930511: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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.930511: Commanding officer recommended...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00226

    Original file (ND03-00226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00226 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 021121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.921215: USS KIRK (FF-1087) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.930122: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA on 930111. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00960

    Original file (ND02-00960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00960 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020624, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030214. 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,...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00882

    Original file (MD99-00882.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Not appealed.940928: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.940928: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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.940929: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01185

    Original file (MD03-01185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01185 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030627. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Ten pages from Applicant’s service record Character reference from N_ N_, ARNP Character reference from R_ J. S_, MEd, Ed S, CM Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00208

    Original file (ND01-00208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.921210: Retention Warning from [SSC, GLAKES, IL]: Advised of deficiency (Article 86: Failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place od duty, to wit: Instructor Prep room, Bldg 616. He was properly notified of his Commanding Officer’s intent to discharge him with an OTH, was given his rights, and he waived all rights, except to obtain copies of documents. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 5, effective 05 Mar 93 until...