Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00788
Original file (MD04-00788.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00788

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040408. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions or uncharacterized. The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20050304. 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. “The issue that has arrissen in the last week. Being the 15 th of March 2004. I was working for Fraser Boiler & Ship Repair through Delphinous a Government Contractor at Norfolk Naval Ship Yard as a Boiler Maker. The Yard or NNSY has been very interested in me. Through comments such as “you need to work here” or “you would do very well here” or “we could use a guy like you with your skills”. All offers were very nice but a little herassing so I politely responded with I can not work a government service job due to the fact that I have a Bad Conduct Discharge. Well about 4 days after making that truthful statement I was let go by my company at customer request. So intern I feel I lost my job because I told the truth about my past. Also you need to known that I wasn’t just a worker for my company but Supervisor or a Foreman. So that being said I hope it gives some insight to the fact that I know my craft, which was never outlined to me not to seek employment into. If I would have known I would never have pursued a career as a boilermaker but I’ve spent a lot of time and effort into my craft and I can’t afford to start into another line of work. A lot of things have changed in my life since I was in the service. I have a wife a home of my own, a child. That and I know what I did was wrong. That being said I just want to be able to do what I do for a living. It been 10 years since I made those mistakes other Members in the Armed forces were discharged for the reason I was discharged were given Other Than Honorable discharges. That and if you look at my Court Martial proceedings you’ll see that even my Platoon SGT testified on my behalf.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant, undated


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                920520 - 920809  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920810               Date of Discharge: 960201

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 19 (Does not include lost time)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 69

 Highest Rank: LCpl                         MOS: 0352

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.2 (4)                       Conduct: 3.7 (4)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: RMB, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

940109:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Illegal Drug Involvement specifically possession and usage of Methamphetamine.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
940113:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: On or about 931206, did at an unknown location, wrongfully use a controlled substance, to wit: methamphetamine.
 Awarded forfeiture of $466.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to E-2. Not appealed.
940422:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

940601:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

940601:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The factual basis for this recommendation was your non-judicial punishment dated 940113 evidencing your use of a controlled substance, specifically methamphetamine.

940621:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

940624:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 1 st Marine Division (Rein)] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

940826:  Pre-trial confinement from 940826 to 941029 (64 days).
        
940930:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a.
         Specification: Did between 940602 and 940609, wrongfully use marijuana.
         Findings: to Charge I and specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $555.00 pay per month for 2 months, reduction to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.
         CA action: 950224. Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD. The accused will be credited 64 days against the sentence to confinement.
        
941026:  Appellate leave approved.

950622:  NC&PB denied clemency and restoration.

951027:  NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

960129:  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 19960201 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. The Applicant was found guilty at court-martial of illegal drug use. He also had a previous NJP for the same offense. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. Relief 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 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 950818 until 010831.

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 112a, illegal drug use.
C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, 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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy    Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501003

    Original file (MD0501003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My name is J_ V_ B_ (Applicant), I am requesting that my Bad Conduct Discharge, from the United States Marine Corps, be upgraded to a General/Under honorable conditions. Nevertheless, t he action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency when a discharge is adjudged by a court-martial case. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s available records and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency is not warranted.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500763

    Original file (MD0500763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00763 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050321. I would like my discharge upgraded and RE code changed in order to apply for benefits for my family and re-enlist in the USMC reserves. I am writing to request that my re-enlistment code be changed so I can re-enlist into the United States Marine Corps.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00227

    Original file (MD01-00227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I've served 11 years 9 months and 28 days of active service and was discharged with a Bad conduct discharge as a result of a Special Court Martial for a violation of Article 114A of the uniform code of Military Justice. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Discharge Upgrading Questionnaire (10 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500792

    Original file (MD0500792.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20000930 – 20001010 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20001011 Date of Discharge: 20030724 Length of Service (years,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600348

    Original file (MD0600348.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that clemency in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was warranted. (no petition for review of NMCCA decision received within time limit).950626: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.950626: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with character of service of bad-conduct as a result of a court-martial. ...

  • 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 | 1999_Marine | MD99-00400

    Original file (MD99-00400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I R____ S_____ believe or think that my discharge should be upgraded to honorable or something other than a bad conduct discharge. Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92(4 Specifications), Specification 1: On 890323 violate a lawful general order by wrongfully possessing two machine gun live tracer rounds in his BEQ room, Specification 2: On 890323 violate a lawful general order by wrongfully possessing a martial arts weapon, Specification 3: On 890323 violate a lawful general order...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01356

    Original file (MD03-01356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 950812: From confinement, to duty. 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 134, false pretenses.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD0400890

    Original file (MD0400890.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions, entry level separation or uncharacterized. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19941104 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600781

    Original file (MD0600781.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the characterization of discharge was appropriate. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (State Director of Veterans Affair-6) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1) PART II -...