Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00357
Original file (MD00-00357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00357

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge 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 000907. 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Conduct triable by courts-martial (request for discharge for the good of the service), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. The reason I am writing this letter is to get my Marine status upgraded.

 The reason I left the service so soon is because my mother became ill.

She was diagnosed with Toxic Shock Syndrome later they found out she had a rare form of skin cancer, and later they found out she had breast cancer. Eventually she passed with lung cancer. Sincerely


 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: USMCR(J)                821218 - 821226  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 821227               Date of Discharge: 930527
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 10 05 01
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 46

 Highest Rank: PFC
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.0 (5)                       Conduct: 3.9 (5)
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 1009
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Conduct triable by courts-martial (request for discharge for the good of the service), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

830908:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [You violated BO P5000.2F by being charged with possession of an open can of beer in an automobile.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

831017:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0400, 22Sep83 to 0400, 23Sep83 (1 day).
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
Specification: Violated BO P5000.2F by operating a M-51 dump truck without proper license on 1130, 27Jun83.
 Awarded correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to Pvt. Not appealed.
831116:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91:
 Specification: Willfully disobeyed order of 2 nd Lt to report for morning road police on 0720, 6Nov83.
 Awarded forfeiture of $286.00 per month for 2 months, extra duties for 45 days. Not appealed.
831209:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Identified as a frequent violator of the UCMJ. Further infractions of the UCMJ, will result in you being processed for a misconduct discharge.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

840105:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Absent from appointed place of duty to wit: firewatch from 600 to 1730.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 91:
Specification: Willfully disobeyed order of Cpl not to go to chow, after being told he should have went at 1500.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
Specification: Derelict in performance of duties by going to show after being posted as firewatch.
Awarded forfeiture of $000.00 per month for 0 months, restriction and
extra duties for 00 days. Not appealed.
840308:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91 (2 specs):
 Specification 1: Disrespectful to Cpl on 0800, 1Mar84, to wit: by saying to him "FUCK OFF".
 Specification 2: Disrespectful to Cpl on 0800,1Mar84 by saying to him "HOLES BAG".
Awarded correctional custody for 30 days. Not appealed.
840417:  Applicant declared a deserter, having been an unauthorized absentee since 0701, 840313 from 1 st CbtEngrBn, 1 st MarDiv,Camp Pendelton, CA.
930420:  Applicant apprehended by civil authorities on 930420 (1000) at Redford, MI.
930421:  Applicant to confinement.
930511:  Applicant, having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Art 27b, requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court- martial. In the request the applicant noted that his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he understood the elements of the offenses. He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other honorable conditions. The applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 13Mar83 to 1000, 20Apr93 (1009 days/apprehended).
930520:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact. SJA recommends approval.
930521:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, VA] determined that applicant had no potential for further service, that separation in lieu of trial by court-martial was in the best interest of the service, and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930527 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial (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.

 The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The applicant must be aware that 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. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, 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 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 | 2000_Marine | MD00-01045

    Original file (MD00-01045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-01045 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000913, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 930727: GCMCA [CG, MCB, Camp Pendleton] determined that applicant had no potential for further service, that separation in lieu of trial by court-martial was in the best interest of the service, and directed discharge under...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00296

    Original file (MD00-00296.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00296 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 2: (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01150

    Original file (MD99-01150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01150 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990825, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Specification 2: Use of marijuana Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 Specification: Unauthorized absence.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00936

    Original file (MD03-00936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00936 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030425. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01257

    Original file (MD99-01257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01257 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990930, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01215

    Original file (MD02-01215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01215 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020821, 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, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E). Relief not warranted.The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00538

    Original file (MD03-00538.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00538 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030204. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00734

    Original file (MD02-00734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00734 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020425, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Specification 9: Unauthorized absence from remedial PT on 891031.Violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: Derelict in duties in scoring only 45 points on a PFT on 891027.Awarded forfeiture of $391.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to PFC. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01057

    Original file (MD99-01057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01057 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990802, 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:Statement in support of claim signed May 1999 Copy of marks Copy of report of medical board dated May 12, 1997 Copy of preliminary findings of the Physical...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00176

    Original file (MD03-00176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00176 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021106, 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, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before...