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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00147

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 011023, 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 020701.  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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Commission of a serious offense (all other) admin discharge board required but waived, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  Dear Naval Council,

I am including this letter with my application and will try to be as brief as possible. I am requesting a review and change of my discharge status for various reasons but one stand's above all; I desire to re-enlist. It has been a desire of mine since 1998 but was told it would be impossible. Recently in talking to an Army recruiter, (in whom my oldest enlisted with), and a vet rep at the career center I was encouraged to try and contacted the V.A.  They in turn sent me this application, as well as encouraged me to send along this letter. I enrolled in the Marine Corps in Jan. of 1978, although on delayed entry.  The circumstance's that lead up to my decision to join were rather different.  I was the oldest of three boy's (by 6 year's), no father, with a single mom trying to hold down two job's. I was the only father figure to my brother's, as well as the only assistance to my mother.  Unfortunately all that responsibility brought with it a fat rebellious attitude, especially towards all type's of authority.  Getting arrested for the first time at the age of 11 for public drunkenness, to getting picked up for burglary at 17 .  The thought of having my record esponged and no jail time or probation sounded pretty good. That was the offer presented to me by the county official's and the Marine recruiter Ssgt H_.  I was young and desperate, so I accepted.
     Content with the decision I made I went on to boot-camp recruiting several other's along the way.  I fell in love with boot-camp, (sounds weird I know), but none the less I enjoyed it.  Then prior to graduation I find that I was not to receive the MOS that I signed up for.  To my suprise the recruiter obviously had my mother and I sign more paper's than needed, for we both remember seeing the MOS promised on the form, but come grad time it turned out to be open contract.  Being extremely upset I felt cheated by the only thing I learned through boot-camp that I could trust "The Corps".  From that time on all the trust instilled in me went right out the window, I more or less just went along for the ride.  Realizing that my new MOS was now going to bring more training much like boot-camp I figured it can't be all that bad.  Although I really enjoyed the infantry training the thought of being so far from home concerned me due to some trouble my mother was having with my younger brother's.  To soon the training was over and my assignment to Colt's Neck NJ came.  I liked the idea of being close for my family; but upon being there I became bored very quickly. I desired something more challenging. Only to soon did the boredom become replaced by trouble on the home front, and my assistance was needed. I used up what time I could get and when I could get no more and my CO was being difficult I once again felt cheated.  Here I was in a situation that required my presence at home for a short time longer and I felt I had no other choice but to go. Thus began a series of AWOL situation's.  Then it came down to being faced with the choice of transfer or discharge.  I first choose discharge, but was once again lied to and discouraged from doing so, (I was told that it would be a BCD and it would ruin my life...), so I felt I had no choice but to accept the transfer, regardless of my plea's for "at least" a hardship. So off to Camp LeJeune, NC. This only seemed to make matter's worse.  Not only was I further from where my presence was needed but they stuck me with the most difficult bunch to work with.  Because of my record thus far it didn't make matter's any easier.  I gave it what I felt was a fair shot, and I believe it could have worked out if only I could have had a little more time. So AWOL led to court-martial, to AWOL to court-martial, until I was informed by my attorney that my request for hardship was approved.  Thus I informed him to send it to me in the mail.  Needless to say I never did hear from any one.
    That is until I wrote a letter to The Commandant of the Marine Corps back in 1987 requesting a copy of the discharge.  Only then did I find out that there never was one issues.  That in turn led to being re-attached to the Marine Corps Reserve Center Ebensburg PA.  I was to go to Quantico VA, but due to having cancer at the time and being under Doctor's care they felt it better that I stay local.  I did however go to Quantico for a complete physical.  Prior to my letter to the Commandant I wanted to re-enlist, but the recruiter informed me that I would need a copy of my DD-214.  At the time of my re-attachment to the Reserve unit I requested numerous times to stay in, only to face a discharge of "under other than honorable".  I then (as before) requested a General or Hardship, only to no avail. With that hanging over my head I still pressed on to College in Oklahoma to attain my asoc. degree in Pastorial Ministry, where I have been involved in various form's of ministry within various religious denomination's; working with all age group's, including counseling some young military personnel.  I have at the same time been self-employed owning and operating a successful Maintenance Contracting company.  I also have six beautiful children to a previous marriage which sad to say ended five year's ago.  Now remarried, and with a clean bill of health (12 year's now),  I desire even more to re-enlist not only before I'm to old , but because my Country need's me.  I would love nothing more than to put to use at least some of that training that is still engrafted deep in my soul for the purpose of bringing justice to those who have violated this Nation.  That plane that came down in PA was practically in my backyard, in fact family worked on the strip mining site where it hit.  Even if I can't get back in I would still like to straighten up my record so I can continue on successfully in the civilian world, that I may further my education and do my part here on the home front in some form of public relation's, perhaps counseling.  So I would hereby request from the Naval Council that an upgrade to the existing discharge status be awarded, not based on the ground's that I have been a productive, profitable U.S. citizen, nor on my strong desire to be apart of the thrust of America's justice towards terrorism, but solely on the mercy of The Naval Council of Personnel Boards.  I thank you for your time and consideration on this matter; may God Bless you and this Great Nation!  Sincerely,

Documentation

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

Statement from applicant dated October 17, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		780128 - 780308	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  780309		Date of Discharge:  890822

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    11  05  14	Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17			Years Contracted:  3

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  48

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.0			Conduct:  3.3*

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  3646

*Marks extracted from SJA's Memorandum dated 15Jul80.

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct-Commission of a serious offense (all other) admin discharge board required but waived, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

781011:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
	Specification: Unauthorized absence from 1800, 31Aug78 to 1700, 29Sep78 (29 days).
	Finding: to Charge I and the specification thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: CHL for 30 days.
	CA action 781011:  Sentence approved and suspended for 3 months.

790413:	Special Court Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specifications):
	Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 28Dec78 to 5Jan79 (8 days).
	Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 15Jan79 to 16Feb79 (32 days).
	Findings: to Charge I and specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  CHL for 1 month, forfeiture of $75 per month for 3 months.
	CA 790413:  Sentence approved and ordered executed.

790507:	Applicant to unauthorized absence.

790606:	Applicant declared a deserter.

800623:	Applicant from unauthorized absence.

800625:	Applicant apprehended and IHCA 1030, 24Jun80.

800626:	Applicant delivered under guard (415 days/apprehended).

800707:	Applicant's request for discharge under other than honorable conditions for the good of the service.

800725:	Commanding General directed retention.

800725:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

800728:	Applicant to unauthorized absence.

800828:	Applicant declared a deserter.

890425:	Applicant from unauthorized absence (3182 days).

890515:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by unauthorized absence during the periods of 7 May 1979 to 23 June 1980 and from 29 July 1980 to 25 April 1989.

890515:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

890614:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Excessive UA's.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

890614:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 

890802:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

890802:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 4th Marine Division (Rein)] directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 890822 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (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.  Concerning a change in reenlistment code, 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.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  The Board grants relief based upon the merit of the applicant’s record and supporting documentation.  While he may feel that he was treated unfairly as a Marine and this became a factor that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Additionally, 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 the service.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6210, Misconduct 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 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