Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01129
Original file (MD04-01129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD04-01129

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040701. 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 20041222. 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 discharge was based on one incident, from there it steamrolled into a discharge of other than honorable status please review my records without any documents relating to my mental condition which I believe led to the decision to discharge me with other than honorable status”

 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)                940718 - 940911  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940912               Date of Discharge: 970221

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 70

 Highest Rank: PFC                          MOS: 6015

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.9 (7)                       Conduct: 3.4 (7)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, COC, MM (2), RMB

 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 :

950411:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Did, at MATSS-901, MATSG-90, on or about 0600, 950401, fail to go to his appointed place of duty, to wit: field day room inspection.
 Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction for 15 days (suspended for 3 months), reduction to E-1. Not appealed.
960306:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ. Failure to be at appointed place of duty on 960225.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
960709:  Not recommended for promotion to E-3 for the month of August due to conduct not becoming of the next grade.

960719:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Lack of maturity and poor judgement, Specifically, on 960515 I was returned from the squadron CAX deployment due to my poor judgement, making me incompatible with the mission I was assigned, guard duty.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

960827:  Not recommended for promotion to E-3 for the month of September due to conduct not becoming of the next grade.

960910:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 960828, knowingly failed to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty; violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Wrongfully communicated to LCpl T_ a threat to injure: “I am going to attack you in your sleep with a baseball bat and kill you.”
 Awarded restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to E-1. Not appealed.
961001:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Alcohol related incident on the night of 960930. SNM was arrested for drunk and disorderly conduct in the town of Welton at 0400. SNM was on leave traveling to a court date in Nebraska]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

961003:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. The factual basis for this recommendation was your continued violations of the UCMJ as detailed in the informal inquiry.

961009:  Not recommended for promotion to E-3 for the month of October due to conduct not becoming of the next grade.

961209:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Applicant informed the lowest characterization possible was under other than honorable conditions.
961209:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
970114:  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.

970220:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

970220:  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 19970221 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. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions for violation of UCMJ, Articles 86 and 134, and adverse counseling entries on other occasions. While he may feel that his mental condition at the time was a factor that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. Discharge for misconduct takes precedence over administrative separation for other potential reasons. 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. Normally, to permit relief, an inequity or impropriety must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such inequity or impropriety 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 31 Aug 01.

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 134, communicating a threat.
C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

 E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00073

    Original file (ND99-00073.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At time of my separation I was told that after several months I could apply to have my discharge changed 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: USNR (DEP) 931014 - 940111 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940112 Date of Discharge:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501493

    Original file (MD0501493.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls well below that required for an upgrade in characterization of service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00280

    Original file (ND00-00280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980304 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00682

    Original file (MD04-00682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “I contend that my Other Than Honorable Discharge should be upgraded to General Under Honorable Conditions and that the narrative reason of for separation be changed from Misconduct Due To A Pattern Of Misconduct to Weight Control Failure. Not appealed.981106: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO’s NJP dated 981001.981111: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:Specification: Absent from appointed place of duty on 0600, 981016.Awarded forfeiture of $591.00 per month for 2 months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500320

    Original file (ND0500320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, NO DISCHARGE AUTHORIZATION AVAILABLE, 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) 941209 - 941219 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 941220 Date of Discharge: 971202 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 11 13 Inactive: None No indication...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00264

    Original file (MD00-00264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00264 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991215, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00383

    Original file (ND01-00383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 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, the Board recognizes that serving in the Navy is very challenging to both the Sailor and his family members. At this time, the applicant...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501452

    Original file (MD0501452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application to the Board:“I was discharged prior to serving out my enlistment which was within a few months away. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19950426 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00794

    Original file (MD04-00794.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, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. 930330: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00322

    Original file (ND00-00322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00322 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000112, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was...