Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600061
Original file (MD0600061.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD06-00061

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20051004. The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060830 . 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 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

No issues were submitted by the Applicant.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Character Reference ltr from T_ G. G_, dtd November 22, 2005
 Letter of Recommendation dtd November 2 2 , 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19980909 – 19980920               COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19980921             Date of Discharge: 20020918

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 03 07 27
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: none
         Confinement:              none

 Age at Entry: 20

 Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 49

 Highest Rank: Cpl                                   MOS: 3451

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.5 (10)             Conduct: 4.3 (10)

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Rifle Sharpshooter, Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation, Meritorious Mast; Letter of Appreciation (2).


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 :

000608:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct c oncerning an incident of spouse abuse as reported by the Onslow County Sheriff’s Department which was substantiated on 17 May 00 as Level III spousal abuse in Case Review Committee by t he Community Counseling Center. N ecessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
0009 1 1:  Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Sep because of a pending CRC Case.

001207:  Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Nov ember because of recent CRC Case. Applicant chose not to make a statement.

 010214:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Failure to provide the adequate required support to my separated wife and daughter after being counseled by my company commander to do so.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance and discharge warning provided .

020802:  L etter from R_ R_, LSCW, Community Counseling Center to GSO9 V_ M_ and CWO3 D_ A. R_.
02082 9 :  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128 (2 specs),
          Specification 1: Did, at 107 N. Ginger Drive, Hubert, NC, on or about 6 May 02, assault Ms A_ C_, by pushing her into the bedroom and choking her.
         Specification 2: Did, at 107 N. Ginger Drive, Hubert, NC, on or about 24 July 02, assault Ms A_ C_, by punching her in the stomach and pushed her into the wall.
         Award: Reduction to E-3 (suspended for 1 month). Not appealed.

 020904:  To confinement.
020905:  U.S. Marine Corps Criminal Investigation Division: Statement of A_ N_ C_.

020906:  Reduction in pay grade awarded at NJP on 020828 vacated due to continued misconduct.
020913:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense with a characterization of service of under other than honorable. The primary reason for your separation is the domestic violence you committed against your wife.
020913:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

020916:  Commanding Officer, Headquarter and Support Battalion, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, recommended to Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense, per paragraph 6210.3 and 6210.6 of the reference. The factual basis for this recommendation was on 8 June 2002, Lance Corporal C_ was counseled per paragraph 6105 of the reference for spousal abuse. On 14 February 2001, Lance Corporal C_ was counseled for not providing adequate child support to his spouse and child. On 29 August 2002, Lance Corporal C_ was found to have assaulted his spouse on 6 May 2002 and again on 24 July 2002. On 5 September 2002, it was brought to my attention that on 28 August 2002, Lance Corporal C_ communicated a threat to kill his wife as well as assault her with a loaded handgun.

020917:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact. [Extracted from CG’s message].

020917:  GCMCA, Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and a commission of a serious offense pursuant to paragraph 6210.3 and 6 2 10.6 of the reference. The primary reason for separation will be a pattern of misconduct pursuant to paragraph 6210.3 of the reference.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020918 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. 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 requests an upgrade of his discharge characterization to honorable. The Board advises the Applicant that w hen the service of a member of the U.S. Marine Corps has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 counseling and one nonjudicial punishment proceeding for violations of Article 128 (2 specs) of the UCMJ. The record of evidence also shows that due to continued misconduct, a r eduction in pay grade awarded at NJP on 020828 was vacated . The board further found that on 000911 and 001207, the Applicant was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Cpl because of a pending CRC Case. The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Marine Corps in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violations of Article 128 are considered serious offenses and a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged at a special or general court-martial. 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. Relief is not warranted.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. Relief 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 additional evidence related to this 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 P1900.16F), effective 01 Sep 2001 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 [e.g., 128 , assault ].

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

D. 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501533

    Original file (MD0501533.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated No issues for consideration were submitted by the Applicant.Issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion): “ Equity Issue: Pursuant to USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part IV, Paragraph 403 m (7), we request, on behalf of this former member, the Board’s clemency relief with an up-grade of his characterization of service on the basis of his post-service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500660

    Original file (MD0500660.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00660 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050302. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19970305 - 19970427 COG Active: USMC 19970428 - 20001003 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20001004 Date of Discharge: 20021113 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 01 10 (Does not exclude lost...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501226

    Original file (MD0501226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or from an attached document/letter to the Board:“Application for correction of military record under the provisions of title 10, U. S. code, section 1552 (5, 6) Application for the review of discharge from the Armed Forces of the Unites States (6):I, R_ E_ K_(Applicant), would like to request that my discharge determination of Other than Honorable be changed to a Medical...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501458

    Original file (MD0501458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Applicant chose not to make a statement.040109: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Feb 04 due to Pending Disciplinary Charges/Non-judicial Punishment. Article 92: Specification 1: In that Lance Corporal B_ F. O_(Applicant), U.S. Marine Corps, on active duty, did, at Camp Pendleton, CA, on or about 11 December 2003, violate a lawful general order, to wit: paragraph 6310.c of Base...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501537

    Original file (MD0501537.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. When I called LCpl R_ (Applicant) into my office, I read him his rights and asked him a series of questions, per the Commander’s guidance. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00291

    Original file (MD01-00291.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in service record.961011: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: Violate a lawful order on 24Sep 96, to wit: female visitor in room after 2200.Awarded forfeiture of $237.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days. Not appealed.970815: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at NJP of 13Mar97.970815: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification 1: Fail to obey a lawful order, to wit: driving out of bounds on forty-eight hour...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01055

    Original file (MD99-01055.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Joint Forces Brig, Disposition Board did meet on 890621 and voted two to one in favor of clemency, the Naval Clemency and Parole Board made their decision to "deny clemency and restoration". I was confirmed as an "above average" prisoner and that warranted a recommendation by the Joint Forces Brig Disposition Board of "separation with a GENERAL DISCHARGE". The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500926

    Original file (MD0500926.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 contends that his discharge was improper as his administrative separation was not part of the sentence adjudged at his special court-martial. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider relief on this basis.The Applicant remains eligible for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500261

    Original file (MD0500261.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) and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “General to have my Code 4 upgraded.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The fourth Marine who came with us, his whole plan was hoping that going U A they would discharge him from the Marine Corps. I also help the other juveniles by talking about my mistakes I...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600993

    Original file (MD0600993.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-, USMC MD06-00993Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060718Characterization of Service: Narrative Reason for Separation: misconduct-pattern of misconduct (ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE BOARD REQUIRED BUT WAIVED)Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: HQSVCBN FMFPAC CAMp SMitH HIApplicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Review Requested: Representation: Decision: Date of...