Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600682
Original file (MD0600682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD06-00682

Applicant ’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060424 . The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable . The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293 .

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070209 . 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 by reason of separation in lieu of trial by court-martial.
The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214. Block 18, Remarks, should read: “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE SERVICE FROM 19890213 TO 19921113;” and Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: “ Conduct triable by courts-martial (request for discharge for the good of the service) .” The Commandant, Headquarters USMC, Quantico, VA, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues
None.

 Documentation
In addition to the service and medical record s , the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant , was considered:
Applicant ’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19880719 - 19890212       COG
         Active: USMC     19890213 - 19921113       HON
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19921114              Date of Discharge: 19940316

Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 01 04 03
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 24

Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 54

Highest Rank: Cpl                                    MOS: 3051 (Warehouse Clerk)

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.7 (4 )                                 Conduct: 4.8 (4 )
Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Sea Service Deployment Ribbon , National Defense Service Medal , Good Conduct Medal , Meritorious Unit Commendation , Rifle Expert Badge (2d A wd)


Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):
UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Conduct triable by courts-martial (request for discharge for the good of the service), authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

92111 4 :  Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years.
Not dated:       Applicant submitted request for administrative separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (NFI).
         [Extracted from Commanding General endorsement, dated 940225.]

 940225 :  GCMCA, Commanding General , Marine Corps Recruit Depot/Eastern Recruiting Region, Parris Island, d irected the Applicant 's discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial.

Service Record Book contains a partial Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940316 in lieu of trial by court-martial (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than 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 (C and D). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).
The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.
In the absence of the complete separation package, the Board presumed that the Applicant was charged with an offense under the UCMC for which a punitive discharge was authorized and that Applicant voluntarily requested administrative separation in order to avoid trial by court-martial. The separation authority referenced the Applicant’s request in his action, and the Applicant acknowledged, in his application, having “asked to get out.” Nothing in the record, or in the Applicant’s application, indicates that the discharge was improper or inequitable. Therefore, relief is denied.

 The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety or inequity after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider 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. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. 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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this 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 P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95 .

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 specified Article s of the UCMJ.

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

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

E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .


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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600779

    Original file (MD0600779.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 920714: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0701.920721: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1300.920816: GCMCA, Commanding Officer, 2d Force Service Support Group, approved the Applicant's request for discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial.921014: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by...

  • 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 | 2000_Marine | MD00-00208

    Original file (MD00-00208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00208 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991129, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 891013 under Other Than Honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial (A and B). You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01184

    Original file (MD99-01184.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-01184 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990903, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION This discharge was based on his conduct during this enlistment.

  • 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01292

    Original file (MD04-01292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 Inactive: USMCR(J) 830311 - 830915 COG Period...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00189

    Original file (MD00-00189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-LCpl, USMC Docket No. MD00-00189 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991118, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01294

    Original file (MD04-01294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • 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...