Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00639
Original file (MD00-00639.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00639

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000421, 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 representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001102. 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/Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. I take full responsibility for my actions, resulting in being discharged under other than honorable conditions. However at the time I was drinking very heavily, and going through a divorce. I regret the choices I made. I ask the Board to please consider my prior honorable service in my request for a upgrade.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copies of applicant's DD Form 214 for periods 780607-811123, 811124-841203 and 841204-871021

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              780607 - 811123  HON
                  USMC             811124 - 841203  HON
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                780109 - 780606  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 841204               Date of Discharge: 871021

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 10 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 46

 Highest Rank: Sgt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.6 (9)                       Conduct: 4.6 (9)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM with 1 Star, NAM, SSDR with 1 Star, Letter of Appreciation (3), MM (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 28

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

UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE /Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

860819:  Applicant to confinement.

861208:  Applicant from confinement.

 861208:  General Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specifications):
         Specification: Absent himself from his unit on 14Jul86 to 31Jul86.
         Additional Charge Article 86:
         Specification: Absent himself from him unit on 0731, 8Aug86 to 0730, 11Aug86 (2 days/surrendered).
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 123A (26 specifications):
 Specification 1: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 287 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 24Jun86.
          Specification 2: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to the Commissary Store, check 288 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $19.20 on or about 24Jun86.
         Specification 3: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 289 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 24Jun86.
         Specification 4: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 290 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 24Jun86.
         Specification 5: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 291 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 25Jun86.
         Specification 6: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 292 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 26Jun86.
         Specification 7: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 293 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 26Jun86.
         Specification 8: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 261 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 28Jun86.
         Specification 9: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 262 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 28Jun86.
         Specification 10: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 263 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 28Jun86.
         Specification 11: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 264 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 28Jun86.
         Specification 12: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 265 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 29Jun86.
         Specification 13: Withdrawn.
         Specification 14: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 241 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 7Jul86.
         Specification 15: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 243 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 7Jul86.
         Specification 16: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 247 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 7Jul86.
         Specification 17: Withdrawn.
         Specification 18: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 246 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 9Jul86.
         Specification 19: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 249 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 10Jul86
         Additional Charges Article 123A:
         Specification 1: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0191, check 128 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $200.00 on or about 16Jul86.
         Specification 2: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0191, check 129 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $200.00 on or about 22Jul86
         Specification 3: Withdrawn.
         Specification 4: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0191, check 297 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $50.00 on or about 24Jul86.
         Specification 5: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0191, check 298 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $200.00 on or about 25Jul86.
         Specification 6: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0191, check 299 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $51.26 on or about 25Jul86.
         Specification 7: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0191, check 131 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $200.00 on or about 26Jul86
         Specification 8: Wrongfully and unlawfully make to MCX 0231, check 244 for payment upon Navy Federal CU without sufficient funds a value of $100.00 on or about 9Jul86.
         Pleas: The accused plead not guilty to Additional Charge I, specification 1 and was found guilty, the findings of guilty were disapproved and dismissed by the Convening Authority. The accused plead guilty to Additional Charge I, specification 2, and was found not guilty. Charge III specification 13 and specification 7, Additional Charge II, specification 3, specification 4, and specification 5, were withdrawn. The findings of guilty as to the remaining charges and specifications were based on the accused's pleas of guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 3 months, reduction to Pvt.
         CA 870612: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the finding of guilty of Spec 1, Add Chg I is disapproved. Spec 1, Add Chg I is dismissed.

 870611:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Absent from appointed place of duty 1200, 26May87 to 1300, 27May87 (1 day).
Awarded forfeiture of $268.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 14 days. Forfeiture of $268.00 and restriction for 14 days suspended for 6 months. Not appealed.
870716:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0731, 16Jul87.

 870722:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 2317, 22Jul87 (6 days/surrendered).

870723:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0037, 23Jul87.

870811:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1400, 11Aug87 (19 days/apprehended).

870826:  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. [Date extracted from CG's letter dated 2Sep87.]

Unknown:         SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact. [Mentioned on the CG's letter dated 2Sep87.]

870902:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing] 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 conditions other than honorable by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 871021 under conditions other than honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). 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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board does not accept alcohol abuse as a factor sufficient to exculpate the applicant from the consequences of his misconduct. While the Board recognizes that alcoholism and alcohol abuse are not, in themselves, offenses which constitute grounds for punishment, it reminds applicants who commit offenses while drinking that they are still responsible for their actions. They must accept the consequences of their misconduct or misbehavior, whether committed before or after they received rehabilitation treatment.

The applicant is reminded that 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. However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D). Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following: evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. The applicant is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15-years from the date of discharge.

 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 P1900.16C), Change 2, effective 15 May 84 until 26 Jun 89.

B. 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.

C. 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.

D. 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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-00158

    Original file (MD01-00158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00158 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. 940830: Applicant's counsel submitted a letter to the commanding general requesting that the applicant's request for separation in lieu of trial by courts-martial be approved and that characterization of service be under Honorable conditions (General). You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00306

    Original file (MD02-00306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION This ended with brig time and a Bad Conduct Discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was involuntarily separated on 870204 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed in the legal chain of review and executed (A and B).

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600850

    Original file (MD0600850.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 (Service 2) (2)Letter from Applicant, dtd March 27, 2006 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19891219 - 19900204 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19900205 Date of Discharge: 19960701 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600165

    Original file (ND0600165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00165 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051103. After returning from treatment, the member states she did not gamble at all for nearly 9 months, and then in July 01, she began to gamble excessively again. 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.

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00005

    Original file (FD2006-00005.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records indicated the applicant had a Special Court Martial, an Article 15, a Vacation, and a Letter of Reprimand for misconduct. He was punished with a suspended reduction to airman, restricted to base for 30 days and a reprimand. CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concluded that the applicant's punitive discharge by Special Court-Martial is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case and there is insufficient basis, as an act of clemency, for change of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500675

    Original file (ND0500675.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.031124: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct commission of a serious offense.031124: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500762

    Original file (MD0500762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and that the narrative reason for separation be changed to: “RE code.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. My problems had to do with my off duty time. The applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016469

    Original file (20090016469.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    e. Additional Charge II, Article 134, Plea: Not Guilty. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The evidence of record does show the applicant was convicted by a GCM and he received a BCD.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000801

    Original file (ND1000801.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service includednon-judicial punishment (NJP) for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 (Attempts, attempted to purchase items without sufficient funds in bank account), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence, 19970314-19970317), Article 123a (Making, drawing, uttering check without sufficient funds; 3 Specifications), Article 134 (Dishonorably failing to pay debt), and Article 134 (Altering public record).When notified of administrative separation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00153

    Original file (ND04-00153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. 970214: NMCCCA: The findings of guilty and sentence as approved on review are affirmed.970711: COMA: Request for appeal denied.970723: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed. The Applicant states that he had only this one negative action in “48+ months.” Despite a servicemember’s prior record...