Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01185
Original file (MD01-01185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD01-01185

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010917, 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. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020529. 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 am request an upgrade in my discharge to an "entry Level separation", Since I have been discharged, I have not been in trouble with the Law; I got back into college and I am doing good. I work for Finkerton Security now, the Number is (---) --- ---- if you want to contact them. I got discharged because I went U.A, I went U.A. just after MCt which was about 4 months into my military career. I was then held pending for 3 months at MCAS Cherry Point, N.C. before I was discharged. I am thinking about joining the air force reserves; the recruiter said I would need either an E.L.S. or honorable Discharge to join. That is why I am asking for an upgrade; plus I may want to work for the State some day (FBI or ATF). When I first joined the Marine Corps I was not ready then; it was not the right time in my life. Now I know that everything is more stable, and I know I could do it now. Thank you for your time

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Character reference dated October 10, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                000203 - 000529  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 000530               Date of Discharge: 010202

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 08 03
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 87

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: NMF)                          Conduct: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 44

 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 :

001218:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence (UA) from 24Sep00 to 7Nov00.
001220:  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 than honorable conditions. The applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 24Sep00 through 7Nov00 (44 days/surrendered).

010126:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

010126:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, NC] 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 010202 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. A characterization of service of entry level separation is only authorized for members who serve 180 days or less. The applicant stated he understood the ramifications of his characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions when he signed his request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial on 20 December 2000. The NDRB found the applicant’s service record devoid of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. 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 | 1999_Marine | MD99-00479

    Original file (MD99-00479.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 850701 under conditions other than honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial (A and B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00762

    Original file (MD00-00762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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) 871022 - 880221 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880222 Date of Discharge: 890104 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 10 13 Inactive: None Age at Entry: 20 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00436

    Original file (ND00-00436.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00436 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. 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’s...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00924

    Original file (MD03-00924.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:1. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Character reference, dated February 4, 2003 Character reference, dated April 1, 2003 Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00413

    Original file (MD00-00413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00413 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000211, 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’s representative submitted the following as issue 1: (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00220

    Original file (MD00-00220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00220 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991130, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 900615: Applicant's statement for request for a separation in lieu of trial by court-martial: "I have had a lot of personal problems at home that has kept me from keeping my mind on the Marine Corps. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique...

  • 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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-00368

    Original file (MD01-00368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00368 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010202, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. A review of the official record indicates that the applicant was separated at the member’s request for an administrative discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, and not just because of his UA status while caring for his ill mother. His service is equitably characterized as being performed under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00200

    Original file (MD04-00200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the service characterization received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. (For both Issues, please see my letter to Review Board)” ______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue in supplement to this Applicant’s petition.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00369

    Original file (MD99-00369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00369 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990114, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found the applicant was given a...