Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00050
Original file (MD03-00050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00050

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20021002, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. 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. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20030828. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. 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, as submitted

1. I am writing on behalf concerning my application for an upgrade of discharge. I am requesting that my discharge be upgraded so I can go back to the Marine Corps. I at least want to complete my commitment and serve my country with strong pride and integrity. I am looking forward to be hearing from you on my request. Sincerely,

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
DD Form 149, dated April 2, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                940618 - 950614  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950615               Date of Discharge: 970228

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 08 14         Does not exclude lost time
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 55

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 2.8 (6)                       Conduct: 4.1 (4)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 212

 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 :

960314:  Applicant in hands of civilian authorities 0001, 960314.

960315:  Applicant released from civilian custody 1130, 960315 (1 day).

960315:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 1131, 960315.

 960318:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1215, 960318 (3 days/apprehended).
960412:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
 Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0715, 960313 until 0745, 960318 (5 days).
Awarded restriction and extra duties for 12 days. Appealed 960412. Appeal denied 960412.
960510:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Frequent involvement with military/civilian authorities and minor incidents prejudicial to good order and discipline.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

960522:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0631, 960522.

960621:  Applicant declared a deserter on 960621 having been an unauthorized absentee since 0631, 960522.

960815:  Applicant apprehended by civilian authorities 1620, 960815.

960816:  Applicant to confinement.

960821:  Applicant from confinement.

960913:  Applicant to unauthorized absence, 0715, 960913.

961226:  Applicant from unauthorized absence, 1514, 961226 (apprehended), returned to military control 1820, 961226. Applicant detained at Beaver, West Virginia until delivered on 2000, 970115.

970115:  Applicant to pretrial confinement.

970127:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0715, 960913 to 970114 (122 days/apprehended).

970212:  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 960913 to 970114 (122 days/apprehended).

970221:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

970224:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Force Service Support Group] 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 19970228 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 Applicant requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial. In the request the Applicant 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’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. 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. 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. Relief not warranted.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, 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. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.
The Applicant 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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 “ 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 | 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 | MD01-00765

    Original file (MD01-00765.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00765 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010510, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Three pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01029

    Original file (MD03-01029.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-01029 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030522. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00114

    Original file (MD00-00114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00798

    Original file (MD04-00798.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 850716 to 890710 (1455 days).890823: SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.890824: Applicant from confinement.890830: GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Marine Division, FMF, Camp Lejeune, NC] determined that Applicant had no potential for further service,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00564

    Original file (MD01-00564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00564 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010323, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Age at Entry: 20 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 42 Highest Rank: LCpl Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Proficiency: 4.1 (5) Conduct: 4.3 (5) Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None Days of Unauthorized Absence: 4920 Character, Narrative Reason, and...

  • 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 | MD02-00599

    Original file (MD02-00599.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I wasn't going to go through with another enlistment. Documentation In addition to the service record (there was NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Permanent Change of Station Orders Incomplete DD Form 214 (Handwritten Information)Report of Separation and Record of Service Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600433

    Original file (MD0600433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant chose not to make a statement.960510: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of April because of your recent NJP.Applicant chose not to make a statement.970106: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0715 on 970106.970115: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0715 on 970115 (9 days).970220: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: In that LCpl H_(Applicant), did, on board MCB Camp P Pendleton, CA on or about 0715, 970106,...