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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD05-01036

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050601.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions).  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051013.  After a thorough review of the available 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 4 to 1 that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the attached document/letter to the Board:

I am writing this to make a formal written request that a correction be made to my DD-214. I was discharged from the Marine Corps. with a General under other than honorable conditions in May of 2004, and I have subsequently begun my college degree in Biblical Studies. I want to be able to become a Chaplain in the Navy upon my graduation which is not possible with my current discharge on record.

After graduating High School in 2003 I left three days later to begin training at Parris Island, SC. After graduating boot camp with a meritorious promotion to PFC as an expert rifleman, swim qualification of 1, a perfect score on the knowledge evaluation, and a 285 First Class PFT I headed to the School of Infantry at Camp Geiger, NC. While there I accepted Christ into my heart for the first time and began to wonder how this would affect me as a soldier. I spoke to my chaplain and he thought I was a conscientious objector, a term I had never heard. I was then ordered to speak to my Company First Sergeant and then to my CO about this. Both of them told me I was wrong and I was basically told to suck it up and deal with it. After this my sergeants began to give me a hard time. I had no problem with this, because I didn’t join the Marine Corps. for a walk in the park. Finally one of my sergeants told me to go UA for 90 days and when I got back I could get classified as a conscientious objector. This is what I did.  After 91 days I turned myself in to Quantico Virginia where I was put in a Separations Platoon and served from January 2, 2004 until May 27, 2004 when I was discharged other than honorable.
I understand that it was a choice I made to go UA, and I am more than willing to deal with the consequences. But I feel that I was just a young kid fresh out of basic training who didn’t know a thing, I was away from home and scared and I took advice from the wrong people. I didn’t even know what a conscientious objector was, but I thought it was something I needed to be classified as in order to stay in the Marines as a Christian. Since then I have matured and I have realized the mistake I made. I am not a conscientious objector, and I am now majoring in Biblical Studies at Evangel University. My goal is to rejoin the Navy as a Chaplain and hopefully make sure nobody else makes the mistake that I did. I hope that this request can be granted and I can once again be allowed to serve my country. Thank you.

					[signed] M_ H_ (Applicant)”

Documentation

Only the service record book was reviewed.  The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USMCR (DEP)	20020712 – 20030526		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20030527		Date of Discharge:  20040524

Length of Service (years, months, days):

Active:    00  11  28  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  107 days
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  17 (Parental Consent) 

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  69

Highest Rank:  PFC				MOS:  9900

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.0 (1) 			Conduct:  4.2 (1) 

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214):  Rifle Qualification Badge (Expert), National Defense Service Medal.

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

030917:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Violation of Article 86 (UA) of the UCMJ resulting in an NJP held on 030917), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

030917:	Battalion NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: In that Private First Class M_ W. H_, U.S. Marine Corps, did, at or about 1700, 14 Sep 03, without authority, absent himself from his appointed place of duty, at which time he was required to be, to wit: Delta Company, Infantry Training Battalion, School of Infantry, Training Command, Camp Lejeune, and did remain so absent until at or about 1400, 15 Sep 03.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $301 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  Not appealed.

030919:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 1800 on 030919.

031019:	Declared a deserter.

040104:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1610 on 040104 (107 days/surrendered).

040407:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Specifically, violation of Article 85 of the UCMJ in that you did, on or about 030919 without authority absent yourself from your appointed place of duty and stayed absent until 040104.  Your conduct and lack of commitment to the Marine Corps has compromised the trust and confidence of your superior, peers, and subordinates, and is unacceptable.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  [Note: Administrative error – Entry shows “85” instead of “86.”]

040408:	Battalion NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: In that Private First Class M_ W. H_, U.S. Marine Corps, Security Battalion, MCB, Quantico, VA, on active duty did, on or about 19 September 2003, without authority, absent himself from his unit, to wit: SOI, Trng Cmd, Camp Lejeune, NC, and did remain so absent until he was apprehended, on or about 4 January 2004.  [Note: Administrative error – Entry shows “apprehended” instead of “surrendered.”]
Award:  Forfeiture of $597 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to E-1.  Not appealed. 

040420:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  The factual basis for this recommendation was your period of Unauthorized Absence from School of Infantry, Training Command, Camp Lejuene, NC between 19 September 2003 to 4 January 2004.  

040420:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.

040421:	Commanding Officer, Headquarters and Service Company, Security Battalion, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, VA, via Commanding Officer, Security Battalion recommended to Commander, Marine Corps Base, the Applicant’s discharge with an under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

040422:	Commanding Officer, Security Battalion forwarded recommending Applicant’s discharge with an under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

040517:	GCMCA, Commander, Marine Corps Base, informed the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMSB) that the Applicant was directed discharged with an under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

GCMCA action references SJA Review as enclosure (6); however, Administrative Discharge package does not contain SJA Review.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20040524 by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

The Applicant contends his discharge was improper due to command misconduct.  He claims, “[O]ne of my sergeants told me to go UA for 90 days and when I got back I could get classified as a conscientious objector.”  The Applicant made a statement just after his return from unauthorized absence that seemingly contradicts this current contention.  On 20040113, the Applicant states: “I am not trying to put blame for my Unauthorized Absence on anybody else but myself, and I take full responsibility for my actions, but I was an 18-year old Marine who thought he had no one to turn to.  So I ran.”  At that time there was no mention of command misconduct.  What is more, the NDRB found no evidence in the available service records and supporting documents to support the Applicant’s claim of command misconduct.  The Board concluded that the Applicant’s claim of command misconduct without providing any credible and substantial evidence is insufficient to grant an upgrade.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The Applicant desires a service characterization upgrade in order to join the Navy and pursue a career as a Chaplain.  The Board recognizes the Applicant’s motivation to reenter military service, yet it is worth reminding the Applicant that the factual basis for discharge was misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  The Applicant was in an unauthorized absence status for 107 days (being declared a deserter after 30 days).  The Applicant is advised that the Board has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into any of the Armed Forces.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  These issues do not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Relief on this basis is not warranted.

The following is provided for the Applicant’s edification.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question, but the Board found no such impropriety or inequity.  While 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 Marine Corps, the Board is authorized 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.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documented community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of documentation that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant claims to be majoring in Biblical Studies at Evangel University; however, at this time, the Applicant did not provided any post-service documentation for consideration.  Relief on this basis is not warranted.

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 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 01 September 2001 until Present).

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.  

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy 	Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023