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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00173

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991116, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  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 000727.  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

1.  Please upgrade the discharge to General Under Honorable Conditions.  In late 1990, while I was stationed in Okinawa with the USMC, I allowed my fiance to handle my financial affairs at home.  My finace mishandled my funds at home in a bank in Yuma, Az.  I was stationed overseas in Okinawa.  I wrote about six bad checks believing that the funds were in the bank.  Although I was guilty of bad judgement in allowing this person to handle my affairs at home, I really was not directly responsible for fraud.  I am in ill health and need to receive treatment in a VA hospital.

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:   USMC		None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		860915 - 870624	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  870625		Date of Discharge:  910620

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  11  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  5 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  83

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.0 (7)			Conduct:  3.9 (7)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR 

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:

881013:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: During the period of 880620 to 880906, did wrongfully appropriate a calling card and make unauthorized phone calls.
Awarded forfeiture of $182.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and 
extra duties for 14 days (restriction and extra duties suspended for 3 months).  Not appealed.

890126:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to be at appointed place of duty on time 890118-0945.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

890208:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failed to go to his appointed place of duty, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Wrongfully possess an unauthorized and false military identification card.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $189.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 14 days ( 7 days suspended for 6 months).  Not appealed.

890214:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Inability to maintain stable financial status, due to oversite on SNM's part]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

890302:	Suspension of NJP imposed and suspended on 890208 for a period of 6 months is hereby vacated and the punishment is ordered executed.
 
890414:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: (3 Specifications); Spec 1: Make and utter to Dominoes Pizza 13 checks for the purchase of goods and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds to payment of such checks in full upon presentation for payment; Spec 2: Make and utter to Dominoes Pizza 2 checks for the purchase of goods and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment of such checks in full upon their presentation for payment; Spec 3: Make and utter to the Marine Corps Exchange, MCAS, Yuma 14 checks for the purchase of goods and did thereafter dishonorably fail to maintain sufficient funds for payment of such checks in full upon their presentation for payment.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $391.00 pay per month for 2 months (forfeiture of $391.00 pay per month for 1 month suspended for 6 months), restriction for 45 days, reduction to E-2.  Not appealed.

900612:	Special Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 123a (17 Specifications): Making or uttering checks totalling $1,618.50, without sufficient funds, for the procurement of currency or things of value, with intent to defraud, between 891031 -891213.
	Charge II:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: (2 Specifications), 
	Specification 1: Forgery of a Leave Authorization Form, NAVMC 3 on 900314, Spec 2: Obtaining services under false pretenses during March 1990.
	Findings:  to Charge I and specification 1 through 17 thereunder, guilty.  To Charge II and specifications 1 and 2 thereunder, guilty.  
	Sentence:  Fine of $482.00 pay per month for 3 months, restriction for 100 days, reduction to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.
	CA 900810: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD.
	
901030:	NC&PB denied clemency and restoration.

901218:	NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

910418:	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 910620 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).

The applicant believes that his fiancée was the sole person responsible for his indebtedness and subsequent BCD.  The Board determined that this was not the case. The applicant alleges he only wrote 6 bad checks; he is mistaken.  The applicant was found guilty of writing 17 worthless checks and for forgery of an official document.  During the court-martial, the applicant stated, for the record, that he knew that he had insufficient funds in his account approximately 4-5 weeks after writing the first bad check. He continued to write worthless checks.  He stated he was “grossly indifferent” when asked if he was indifferent about the payment of those checks in full when presented for payment.  Additionally, the applicant was convicted of forging a set of leave papers.  To both of these charges, the applicant pled guilty and was convicted of the same.

The Board determined that his was not the applicant’s first violation of the UCMJ for  writing worthless checks.  Two months prior to the Special Court-Martial, while in Yuma, the applicant was found guilty of writing 29 worthless checks.  The applicant clearly had an established pattern of indebtedness.   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 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	

.