Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00112
Original file (MD00-00112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00112

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991028, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000622. 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. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE/Misconduct-Absent without leave (admin discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

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)                780726 - 781023  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 781024               Date of Discharge: 930709

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 08 02 (excludes UA)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 28

 Highest Rank: Cpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: N/A                           Conduct: N/A

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 4725

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

UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE /Misconduct-Absent without leave (admin discharge board required but waived), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

800525:  Applicant to unauthorized absence, 0730, 25May80.

930429:  Applicant in hands of Dallas County police at 1251, 30Mar93 and delivered to military authorities 1910, 29Apr93 (4722 days/apprehended).

930430:  Applicant to confinement.

930609:  Applicant from confinement and to duty.

930517:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under condition other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by his being absent without leave 0730, 25May80 until 30Apr93 (4725 days/apprehended).

930517:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under condition other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by being absent without leave from 0730, 25May80 until 1910, 30Apr93.
930520:          Applicant advised of his 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.

930706:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] directed the applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930709 under conditions other than honorable for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (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).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, ( MCO P1900.16D), effective 890627 until 950817, Paragraph 6210, Misconduct.
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., Article 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days].
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 | 1999_Marine | MD99-01084

    Original file (MD99-01084.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000512. 920612: Summary Court-Martial Charge I: violation of UCMJ Article 86: about 24MAR92, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and did remain so absent until on or about 26MAR92 (2 days). 920921: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: unauthorized absence 0730, 09SEP92 - 10SEP92.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00201

    Original file (MD01-00201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00201 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The record shows the applicant was UA from the Marine Corps over 12 years.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00516

    Original file (MD04-00516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DRAFT DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-LCpl, USMC Docket No. The only change from MCO P1900.16C is: “administrative” vice “admin”) GKQ1 Misconduct-Commission of a serious offense (all other) with administrative discharge boardHKQ1 Misconduct- Commission of a serious offense (all other) administrative discharge board required but waived For SPD Codes GKD1, Misconduct-Absent without leave (with administrative discharge board)...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01145

    Original file (MD03-01145.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01145 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030618. 900806: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00095

    Original file (MD99-00095.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions was based on one isolated event in 36 months of service. The applicant has provided sufficient documentation of his good character and conduct that the Board recommends partial relief by upgrading the applicant’s discharge to UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – Commission of a serious offense (all other) with admin discharge board, authority. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01199

    Original file (MD03-01199.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00918

    Original file (MD99-00918.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000310. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 961101 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A and B). 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00056

    Original file (MD03-00056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00056 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021002, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of Travel Orders PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00574

    Original file (MD03-00574.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Marine. The Board found that the positive aspects of the Applicant’s record, the personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00626

    Original file (MD99-00626.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 (D and E).In response to the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that there is nothing in the applicant’s service record nor did the applicant provide sufficient evidence to show that he was being processed for a hardship discharge. In response to the applicant’s request to have the narrative reason for discharge changed to...