Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01102
Original file (MD01-01102.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD01-01102

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010814, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Whitesburg, KY. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the Washington, DC Area. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.
Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020320. 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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues

1. I feel that I was treated poorly and this unit is a poor representation of what the Marine Corps is supposed to be. I D____ W___ joined the Marines with good intent to keep a family tradition going I graduated boot camp with a broken 1" fractured leg. Went through SOI school with flying colors, then I was assigned to the 3 RD BAT 5 TH Marines 1 st DIV. As soon as I arrived terrible things were already happening at this section of the base. There were a lot of hazing going on, matter of fact within the first few days of my arrival I was terribly hazed for no reason. My unit was already under investigation for hazing. Then I had a shoulder injury to the rotation cuff. Diagnosed by a naval doctor, I was put on no duty by the doctor, then I was forced against my doctors order and my will to participate in a week long training exercise, which included a 15 mile hump which was strictly against my doctors orders. Then once we were in the hills of California training I was even hazed there once I reported my pain to the squad leader I was called names, fisted down, & had a large rock thrown at and hit me in the head. No action were taken against the individual that struck me. I also had hardship at home, my father had had a heart attack recently and the income at my household wasn't enough I put in for a transfer to a close base, even with doctors notifying my leader all request were either ignored or put away (while my family was suffering.
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: USMC              None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990330               Date of Discharge: 001117

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 00 06 19
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 46
Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency: 2.6 (4)                       Conduct: 3.5 (3)

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 344
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

991018:  Applicant declared a deserter on 0700, 991018.
000921:  Applicant apprehended by Madison Twp Police Department, OH on 000921 (1500). Delivered to org at 1700, 000926.
001011:  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: Did on or about 991018, without authority, absent himself from his organization, to wit: 3 rd Battalion, 5 th Marine Regiment, 1 ST Marine Division, located at Camp Pendleton, California, and did remain so absent until he was apprehended on or about 000921.
001106:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact [Extracted from CG's message].
001106:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, 3250 Catlin Avenue, 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 001117 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).
Issue 1. The Board found no credible documentation to support the applicant’s allegations of injustices suffered while on active duty. While the applicant may feel that his family problems and alleged unfair treatment by his command were factors that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The record is devoid of evidence 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. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred 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. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He 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. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.

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 P1900.16E), effective
18 Aug 95 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 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 “ afls10.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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-00666

    Original file (MD02-00666.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00666 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020409, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. In the Applicant’s request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, he certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other than honorable...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00822

    Original file (MD02-00822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00822 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020517, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. A sergeant that had inspected our room was from the office I had worked at for the unit. Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00782

    Original file (MD03-00782.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00782 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I was home for about 10 days when I realized that things were way worse than they had been made out to me over the phone by my wife and so I called my new school to request extra time for leave about 2 weeks, and was told I could have only three days, which I told the Master.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01273

    Original file (MD02-01273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01273 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020904, 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, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service. 900522: GCMCA [CG, MCB, Camp Lejeune] determined that Applicant had no potential for further service, that separation...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01182

    Original file (MD03-01182.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01182 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030625. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under 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 (D and E).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01121

    Original file (MD99-01121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01121 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990820, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. st Marine Division (Rein), FMF, 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 conditions other than honorable by reason of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00068

    Original file (MD00-00068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00068 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991018, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 850919: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA 2100, 850623 to 0930, 850715 (22days).Awarded forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days (suspended for 6 months). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00889

    Original file (MD03-00889.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00889 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030407. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00495

    Original file (MD03-00495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00454

    Original file (MD03-00454.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00454 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030124. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...