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

 ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01517

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030924.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Board first conducts a documentary record review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040617.  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.  This letter is to two groups of people.  The first group is the people that have the authority to upgrade my discharge so that I can get back into the USMC.  The second group is everyone else in the United States armed forces.  Here we go. I want to apologize to everyone for the course I took about six and a half years ago.  There is no word, phrase, or action that can be used to express the level of shame, disappointment, or embarrassment I have experienced.  As we all know, young people can make some pretty dumb decisions that can possibly affect them for the rest of their lives.  I was one of those young people.  I was given the opportunity of my life.  I was able to serve in the United States Marine Corps.  Somewhere along the line, something tragic happened. I lost my focus. I forgot what a great thing I had. I did not listen to what anyone told me and started doing things “my own way” (the wrong way).  Of course I knew what was best for me.  WRONG!! Sir or ma’am, some people make mistakes in their lives and die with that mistake never having tried to correct it.  I know it has taken me a long time, but I have decided to do whatever it takes, legal and moral, to correct the most major mistake of my life.  Do I deserve this monumental chance at redemption?  Some people would say most definitely not.  Other people would say yes.  I believe in a second chance.  Otherwise I could not write this letter.  My feelings probably have very little to do with the decision that you will make but ever since I decided to do this I have felt a thousand times better about life.  I was raised in the Marine Corps and I have always loved the Marine Corps.
Knowing this, I get on my knees and beg you.  Please upgrade my discharge so that I can live a happier, fuller life IN the United States Marines Corps.  In exchange, I give you my all.  This includes my heart, my body, my dedication, commitment and loyalty forever.  You and everyone else (in the Marine Corps and civilians) WILL NOT BE SORRY.  I promise you that.

Once a Marine ALWAYS a Marine!!!!

Again, please help me to make this right.  Everything this letter says boils down to this: It is not just about upgrading my discharge.  It is about having the opportunity to re-enlist into the USMC.  Then life begins.

Sincerely,
T_ L_ C_ jr”

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:   
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		951006 - 951022	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  951023		Date of Discharge:  970910

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  11  17  [Does not exclude lost time]
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  84

Highest Rank:  PVT

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.5 (1)			Conduct:  4.5 (1)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  77

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:

960324:	To unauthorized absence.

960704:	From unauthorized absence.  Surrendered SOI, Camp Pen.
	
960702:	Special Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (1 Specification):
	Specification 1:  UA fr 24 Mar 96 to 10 June 96
	Findings:  to Charge I and specification 1 thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  30 days confinement and a bad conduct discharge.
	CA 961119:  Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD.
	
970530:	NMCCMR:  Affirmed findings and sentence.

971010:	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 19970910 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 NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  There is no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge.  The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented.  Therefore, relief is denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy or Marine Corps.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commandant, United States Marine Corps, Code MMEA, 3280 Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no such errors 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, however, 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 and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief is appropriate.

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 other evidence related to his discharge at that time.  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 present. 

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 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, 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 “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