Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500451
Original file (MD0500451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00451

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050112. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to “ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION.” The Applicant requested a documentary record review. The Applicant did not list a representative on his DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050214. 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 and reason for 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 stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

 1. “DATE ENTERED INTO ACTIVE DUTY IS 1990317, DATE OF DISCHARGE IS 19990825. HAS LESS THAN 180 DAYS. PLEASE, I’M WORKING WITH A RECRUITER, AND I HAVE TO UPGRADE MY DISCHARGE TO AT LEAST AN ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION SO I CAN RE-ENLIST .”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active:                            None                       HON
         Inactive: USMCR (J)               981027 - 990203  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990204               Date of Discharge: 990825

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 05 09 (Accounts for lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 59

 Highest Rank: Pvt                          MOS: 9900 (Basic Marine)

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 3.6 (2)                       Conduct: 2.4 (2)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: (43) 990523-990705

 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 :

990523:  Applicant UA (AWOL).

990625:  Applicant declared a deserter on 990623 having been an unauthorized absentee since 1800, 990523 from MatCo, HqSptBn, SOI, MCB Lejeune.

990706:  Applicant from UA (AWOL) after surrendering to military authorities.
990716:  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 honorable conditions. The Applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 1800, 23 May 1999 - 2239, 6 Jul 1999.

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

990802:  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 reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

 Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990825 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: In response to the Applicant's issue concerning his less than 180 days of service, normally b y regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given a service characterization of “Uncharacterized” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance or conduct which would merit a different discharge characterization. The Applicant’s record shows he was in an unauthorized absence status for 43 days during which he was declared a deserter. A service characterization of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a member of the United States Marine Corps. In a signed statement, the Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veteran’s benefits based upon his current enlistment. He also understood he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received there from may have a bearing. The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged. He admitted he was guilty of violating Article 86: unauthorized absence.
The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than six months in the military to mitigate his misconduct. Relief denied.

Concerning the Applicant’s desire to reenlist, 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. This issue does not serve to provide foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

T here 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 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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. Relief denied.
 
The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. 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 31 August 2001.

 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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

 E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

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 | 2000_Marine | MD00-00954

    Original file (MD00-00954.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00954 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000728, 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found no evidence in the record to support the applicant’s assertion that “…at the time of discharge I...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00398

    Original file (MD00-00398.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00398 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000209, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 stated his issue that he was having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00575

    Original file (MD04-00575.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-PVT, USMCDocket No. MD04-00575 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040224. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00922

    Original file (MD02-00922.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00922 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020614, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. After repeated requests for assistance from the command and no apparent actions made by the CO, she returned to me for assistance. On 990216, the Applicant requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court- martial.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00302

    Original file (MD04-00302.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00302 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031205. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500031

    Original file (MD0500031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation The Applicant did not provide any additional documentation for the Board to review. The Applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: unauthorized absence, from 4 May 1991 until apprehended on 26 November 1991.920207: GCMCA [Base Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] determined that Applicant had no potential for further...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500179

    Original file (MD0500179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00179 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20041108. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I know I agreed to exit the service instead of awaiting the court-martial, but that decision was a decision based on the advise of my lawyer at the time because of the chage sheets that were being filed on me due to the lack of a case on the part of the prosecution.” Documentation In...

  • 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 | 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0501270

    Original file (MD0501270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other honorable conditions. 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. 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...