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

 ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD99-00400

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990126, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge 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 991206.  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.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/As a result of a courts-martial (SPCM) – Other, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  I R____ S_____ believe or think that my discharge should be upgraded to honorable or something other than a bad conduct discharge.  I think I didn't do anything wrong to be kicked out like that.  It has really held me down ever since.  I spent 23 months in the U.S.M.C, and did a very good job, and made it very well.  I thought that for people like me should be able to see something from their work and decent military service and record.  Because of it, I have no benefits for what I would like to do, its like I'm no a veteran at all, and I should be.  I would like to get on with my life somehow.  If I had an honorable discharge I would do what ever I could to preserve it.  My discharge may have been unjust.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copies of DD Form 214 (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   USMC		None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		861118 - 870105	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  870106		Date of Discharge:  900722

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  04  01
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  40

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.2 (7)			Conduct:  4.2 (7)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR, Rifle Marksman Badge 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/As a result of a courts-martial (SPCM) - Other, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

880111:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to be at appointed place of duty.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

890322:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failed to go at the time prescribed to formation at 0700-1010, 890314 at BrdgCo, 7th EngrSptBn, 1st FSSG, violation of UCMJ Article 86: Failed to go at the time prescribed at place of duty at Bldg 1443 from 0700-0730, 890316 at BrdgCo, 7th EngrSptBn, 1st FSSG, violation of UCMJ Article 91: Disobeying a lawful order given by Sgt A_______ to report to the company, after being caught sleeping in the rack at 0815, 890314.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  Not appealed.

890324:	To confinement, Sentence of SPCM.

890522:	Special Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 89:(1 Specification),
	Specification 1: On 890323 behave himself  with disrespect toward 1st LT A.R.A_______.
	Charge II:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 91(2 Specifications),.
	Specification 1: On 890323 assault Sgt P. L. H______by striking him on the forehead with his forehead, Specification 2: On 890323 was disrespectful in language toward Sgt P.L H______. 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 by wrongfully possessing two AFID cards, Specification 4: On 890323 violate a lawful general order by wrongfully possessing drug paraphernalia, Charge IV: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a: (2 Specifications), Specification 1: Wrongfully use amphetamine/methamphetamine within 7 days prior to 890323, Specification 2:Wrongfully use amphetamine/methamphetamine with 7 days prior to 890214. Charge V: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: (1 Specification), Specification 1: Drunk and disorderly on 890323.
	Findings:  to Charge I, and specification 1 thereunder, guilty.  To Charge II and specification 2 thereunder, guilty.  To Charge III and specifications 1,2,3 and 4 thereunder, guilty.  To Charge IV and specifications 2 thereunder, guilty. To Charge V and specification 1 thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  CHL for 5 months, forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for 5 months, reduction to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.
	CA 890818:  Only so much of the sentence as provides for a BCD, 90 days confinement, forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for 5 months and reduction to E-1 approved and, except for  the BCD, ordered executed 
	
890606:	From confinement, to duty.

890606:	To appellate leave.

900606:	Applicant waived rights to clemency review.

891215:	NMCCMR:  Affirmed findings and sentence.

900702:	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 900722 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed in the legal chain of review and executed (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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue has no merit.  The applicant claims he didn’t do anything wrong, his discharge has held him back and he has no benefits.  The applicant was found guilty, at Special Court-Martial, of disrespect, disrespectful language, possessing machine gun live tracer rounds in his BEQ room, wrongful possession of martial arts weapons, wrongful possession of two AFID cards, wrongful possession of drug paraphernalia, two specifications of illegal drug use and drunk and disorderly.  It is true that a Bad Conduct discharge will effect your options in the civilian world and you are not entitled to military benefits.  The applicant has not provided the Board with any documented evidence to show that he has become a credible citizen, living a life worthy of clemency and upgrade to his discharge.  Relief denied. 

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURTS-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 violation of the UCMJ, Article [ e.g., 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

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
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington, D.C.  20374-5023