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

 ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00513

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020305, 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. In the acknowledgement letter the applicant was informed that he was approaching the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D. C. area. The applicant responded advising the Board he would not appear, but would appoint counsel and send post-service information.  Nothing was received from applicant.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 021115.  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 CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE/Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

To whom it may concern,

	My name is L_ B_.  I am 34 years old.  I was 18 years old and just out of high school when I joined the Marine Corp.  I graduated from boot camp at MCRD in CA.  My MOS was sea duty barrack duty.  I did end up in sea school but I wasn’t informed of the Infantry school that I had to go through first.  My recruiter did not inform me of that.  I was under the assumption that after boot camp I was to go to sea school.  This really was a shock to me because I felt the recruiter was not honest with me.  But I accepted this, reluctantly.  I attended camp Pendleton for Infantry school.  But when I got there I ended up working there in the chow hall washing dishes fourteen hours a day while reservist came through. I guess what I am getting at is I wish that I could do it all over again. I would have stayed through everything.  Now that I am older by thirteen years I have learned that things never stay the same – the good or bad.  Out of all of the decisions I have made it my life this one has haunted me for the last fourteen years.  There is not a day that goes by that I don’t think of the mistake I made and wish I could do something about it.  I have had many years to think about what I’ve done and the circumstances that have come from my leaving the Marine Corp.  I am more mature now than I was then.  I own my own home.  I have a wife of nine years and children.  I know that things that were going on when I was 18, things not going my way or being the way I wanted them to is just a part of life.  Some people learn this earlier in life, some don’t.  I guess I was one of those who did not.  But I’ve learned in the last 13 years life is full of surprises and things do get a lot harder than what you think they will at age 18.  When I look back I wonder how my family and I made it through some of the things we did.  In my heart I know only by the Grace of God.  If only I had that way of thinking then as I do now.  I would just like to ask you, is there anything in your life you wish you could take back or do differently? Because it is out of your hands?  I am asking and praying that someone could please help me with turning this mistake around and be able to re-join the Marines.  I know I can be a great Marine.  I will give 110% of me to do so.  Life itself requires that if you want to be a good husband & father & person. This has been a dream of mine for a long time. I understand the responsibility in being a Marine.  But looking back I just did not have enough discipline to stick it out.  I will tell you now what I did wrong.  I became angry of having to wait and let the reservist go through school first and I had to do dishes.  I was mad about the way I was done.  They went down a list of names.  Depending on what category your last name fell under is what you did.  Mine – chow hall.  My name started with a B, the list ended around D or E.  So I left after we were done one evening.  I spent a long time in the Brig for what I done.  This has been a heavy load to carry.  I feel like I cheated myself out of something that could have been great.  And my country out of a good servant.  If thee is anything you can do to upgrade by discharge from a RE-4 to where I can re-enlist -  I will always be in great debt to you.  
	Thank you for the time you have taken.

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:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		851026 - 860811	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  860812		Date of Discharge:  870227

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  06  16
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  35

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  2.1			Conduct:  4.3 [From SJA memo, 870220]

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  39

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

UNDER CONDITIONS OTHER THAN HONORABLE /Separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

870120:	Applicant declared a deserter on 870120 having been an unauthorized absentee since 1700, 861216 from ITS, MCB, Camp Pendleton, CA.

870203:	Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 12 Dec 86 to 22 Jan 87.

870206:	Applicant, having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Art 27b, requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court- martial.  In the request the Applicant noted that his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he understood the elements of the offenses.  He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other than honorable conditions.  The Applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 1700, 16 Dec 86 to 1300, 22 Jan 87 (39 days/surrendered).

870220:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

870220:	GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, CA] 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 conditions other than honorable by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 870227 under conditions other than honorable in lieu of trial by court-martial (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.  The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The Applicant, having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Art 27b, requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court- martial.  In the request the Applicant certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other than honorable conditions.  Relief denied.

Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  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.  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.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief denied. 

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 P1900.16C), Change 2, effective 15 May 84 until 26 Jun 89.

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