Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01024
Original file (MD03-01024.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01024

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030521. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Norwalk, CA. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing; also advised that the NDRB does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington Capital Region.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040415. 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: BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “I J_ O_ (Applicant) respectfully request to have a discharge upgrade I believe I was wrongfully enlisted in a different M.O.S. than I was originally interested in I was interested in bein a mechanic but instead went infantry I was disqualified for mechanic for color blindness but since I have been out I have done many physicals and have not been labled color blind in any of them Please review my case.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                970917 - 980713  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980714               Date of Discharge: 010212

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 06 29 [Doesn’t exclude lost/confinement time & appellate leave]
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 38

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 2.7 (Unknown)                         Conduct: 2.1 (Unknown)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Expert Badge

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 93

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

BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

990304:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 1801, 990223, to 1345, 990225.
 Awarded forfeiture of $239.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and
extra duties for 10 days. Not appealed.
990603:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): Unauthorized absence from 2001, 990312, to 2030, 990314; UA from 1710, 990320 to 1128, 990323, UA from 0501, 990408 to 0830, 990429.
         Award: Forfeiture of $479.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
990706:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Violation of UCMJ, Article 86, unauthorized absence from 2001, 990312 to 2030, 990314, UA from 1710, 990320 to 1128, 990323, UA from 0501, 990408 to 0830, 990429.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

990816:  Applicant declared a deserter on 990806 having been an unauthorized absentee since 1801, 990707 from School of Infantry, Camp Pendleton.

990901:  Applicant apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control. Delivered to School of Infantry, Camp Pendleton, CA.

990901:  Pretrial confinement.

991001:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
         Specification: Did, on or about 7 July 99, without authority, absent himself from unit, until apprehended on or about 1 September 99.
         Findings: to Charge I and specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement 40 days, forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for one month and a bad conduct discharge.
         CA 000327: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD.

991022:  To appellate leave.

001031:  NMCCCA: Affirmed findings and sentence.

010212:  SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, bad conduct discharge ordered executed.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010212 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. That sentence was subsequently approved by both the convening and appellate review authorities (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).

Issue 1. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency (C, Part IV). The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB found the Applicant’s service record absent of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offense for which the discharge was awarded. 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.
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 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 950818 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.


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 | 2005_Marine | MD0500918

    Original file (MD0500918.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20020905 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the Applicant’s issues were insufficient to merit clemency (C). The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501350

    Original file (MD0501350.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Inactive: None Time Lost During This Period (days): Unauthorized absence: 164 days Confinement: 33 days Age at Entry: 17 (Parental Consent) Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 61 Highest Rank: PVT MOS: 0300 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Proficiency: NA* Conduct: NA* Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Rifle Sharpshooter Badge. 980304: Appellate review...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00926

    Original file (MD02-00926.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00926 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020611, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant dated May 14, 2002 Two pages from Applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00947

    Original file (ND02-00947.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00947 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020619, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 010207: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0730 on 010207 (113 days/ surrendered).010308: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, misconduct due to civil...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00143

    Original file (ND01-00143.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00143 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001115, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 660225 - 690718 HON...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00487

    Original file (ND01-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00487 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010306, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Award: Restriction for 60 days, reduction to AR. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000614 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01056

    Original file (MD99-01056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01056 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990729, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Entry Level Separation or Uncharacterized. 900629: GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01028

    Original file (MD02-01028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 and 2: The Applicant contends that his post-service conduct, to include employment, family life, and the fact that he no longer drinks nor uses drugs, should be considered in the recharacterization of his discharge. This was the case with the Applicant who was placed on appellate leave until his sentence,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600402

    Original file (MD0600402.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 (2)Character Reference from B_ V. G_ Jr., undatedCharacter Reference from J_ R. B_, dtd October 20, 2005 State of Connecticut DVA cover letter, dtd December 6, 2005Excerpts from Applicant’s service records (27 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19930423...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500780

    Original file (ND0500780.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ex-AR, USN Docket No. 891003: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1930 on 891003 (174 days/surrendered).891009: Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (4 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 880802 to 880805, (2) Unauthorized absence from 880906 to 890123, (3) Unauthorized absence from 890125 to 890411, (4) Unauthorized...