Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00305
Original file (MD02-00305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00305

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the Disabled American Veterans.

Decision

A personal appearance discharge review hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030325. 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 at the time of issue. 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.

 A personal appearance discharge review hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on XXXXXX. 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.

 If appropriate add the following:
The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read: “_____________” vice “__________”. The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.






THIS IS THE CORRECT SHELL FOR A SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, EFFECTIVE 15 APR 84 UNTIL 26 JUN 89. There is not a shell for SIL8707 because P1900.16C, Ch 4, effective 870729, was not applicable to par. 6419.

THE CORRECT NARRATIVE REASON FOR SEPARATION FOR SPD CODE KFS1 IS “Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial”. (Listed on page 1-50 of MCO P1900.16C, Change 2, effective 15 Apr 84)

A general discharge is written “ UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)” (See MCO P1900.16C, page 1-37, effective 1 Oct 82)

An under other than honorable conditions discharge is written “UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE” (See MCO P1900.16C, page 1-37, effective 1 Oct 82)

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues, as submitted

1. I received awards and decorations.

2. I had combat service.

3. My record of promotions showed I was generally a good service member.

4. I had prior honorable discharges.

5. My use of alcohol impaired my ability to serve. Through the course of my career, alcohol dependency and abuse increased.

6. The punishment I got at discharge was too harsh. It was much worse than most people got for the same offense.

7.       We request equitable relief of the current discharge based on the good prior service of
the member.
8. We request consideration for post service activities to further improve the FSM’s present day situation.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant's DD Form 214 (current and previous enlistment)
Letter of recommendation from W_ N. C_ dated March 25, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                720618 - 720717  COG
         Active: USMC              720718 - 770117  HON
         Active: USMC              770118 - 810416  HON
         Active: USMC              810417 - 840227  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 840228               Date of Discharge: 871231

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 10 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 30                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 33

 Highest Rank: GySgt

 Enlisted Performance Evaluations : FITREPs were available for review.

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFOUR, SSDR with Star, GCM with 4 Stars, NAM, MM, MCEM with Star, Certificate of Commendation, NUC with Star, CAR, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 79

 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 :

840228:  Applicant reenlisted for 4 years.

851115:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0801-0930, 14Nov85.
Awarded forfeiture of $49.00 per month for 1 month. Not appealed.
870815:  Applicant's driving privileges aboard MCAS, CPNC revoked/suspended for a period of 1 year.

 870901:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111:
 Specification: Driving while impaired (BAC .21%) on 0305, 15Aug87.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence 0731, 17Aug87 to 0730, 19Aug87 (1 day/surrendered).
Awarded forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months. Not appealed.
870908:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 1201, 8Sep87.

871013:  Applicant in hands of civilian authorities, 1500, 13Oct87.

871125:  Applicant from unauthorized absence.

 871231:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under conditions other than honorable by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

Separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

 Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 871231 under conditions other than honorable 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).

Issues 1-4, 6-7. The Board agrees that the Applicant had previous honorable enlistments distinguished by combat service, and awards. However, the Board found that even his solid prior service did not sufficiently mitigate his subsequent misconduct to warrant an upgrade to his final discharge. The Applicant requested separation in lieu of trial by court-martial and the Board presumes that the Applicant understood the implications of his request. All Marines separated in lieu of trial by court-martial normally receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and are reduced in rank if a NCO or above. Relief denied.

Issue 5. While the Applicant may feel that his use of alcohol was a factor that contributed to his actions, 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.

Issue 8. The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country during his last period of enlistment. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. 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. As the Applicant is aware, having three earlier periods of honorable service, military service is challenging and our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country. 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. The regulation does not clearly define this authority, but in fairness to those who have served honorably, the Board is very judicious in its application of this authority. After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board acknowledges the positive direction the Applicant’s life has taken since his discharge. He is to be commended for his completion of the South Baltimore Station program and his stated desire to turn his life around. However, the Board determined that the Applicant’s evidence of post service accomplishments was insufficient to mitigate the character of his discharge. Relief not warranted.



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. 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; and Article 111, driving while impaired.
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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-00576

    Original file (MD01-00576.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00576 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant is not eligible for further review by the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00824

    Original file (MD01-00824.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00824 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010530, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. H_ of base legal after I was acquitted of a General Court-Martial, a month or two later I was charged with a bogus urine sample which was later dismissed, than I was charged with Unauthorized Absence which I requested mast and it was dismissed. Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A. Paragraph 6419,...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00639

    Original file (MD02-00639.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00639 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020404, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030116. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 870402 under conditions other than honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial (A and B).

  • 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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-00093

    Original file (MD01-00093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00093 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001023, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable or General/under Honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 851004 under conditions Other Than Honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial (A). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is...

  • 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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-00392

    Original file (MD01-00392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00392 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010208, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. 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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-00566

    Original file (MD02-00566.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00566 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall change to: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Conduct triable by courts-martial (request for discharge for the good of the service), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419 .A general discharge is written “ UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)” (See MCO P1900.16D, page 1-33, effective 27 Jun 89) An...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00144

    Original file (MD02-00144.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00144 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011023, requested that the characterization of service on the 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).Issue 1. Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY...