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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD05-01426

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050823.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  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 20060524.  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 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 application to the Board:

“My discharge was improper because my time on Active duty was honorably served.  I had meritorious promotions Good conduct medal 961022 Meritorious Mast.”

Documentation

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

DD Form 215
Applicant’s DD Form 214  (Member 1)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USMCR (DEP)	19780206 – 19780212		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19780213		Date of Discharge:  19961118

Length of Service (years, months, days):

Active:    01  10  21  (excludes lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  6173 days
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  18 

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  46

Highest Rank:  LCpl				MOS:  7011

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.5 (1)				Conduct:  3.0 (1) 

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214):  Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Meritorious Mast

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:

790918:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0001 on 790918.

960813:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0720 on 960813, apprehended by civilian authorities at Cody, Wyoming.
 
960916:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  The factual basis for this recommendation was commission of a serious offense being in an unauthorized absence status from 790918 to 960812.  Applicant informed the least favorable character of service possible is under other than honorable conditions.

960916:	Commanding Officer, HQHQRON, MCAS EL Toro, recommended to Commanding General, MCAS El Toro, that the Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  

961008:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

961018:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

961022:	Commander, Marine Corps, Air Bases Western Area, advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMSB) that the Applicant will be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19961118 by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  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 (C and D).  

The Applicant contends that his discharge is improper because his “time on Active duty was honorably served.”  The Applicant is reminded that he entered active duty on 19780213.  The Applicant’s period of active duty ended on 19961118, when he was separated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense for his 6,174 days of unauthorized absence.  The Applicant’s deserter status ended as a result of his apprehension.  The Applicant committed a serious offense and was properly notified of his Commanding Officer’s intention to recommend his separation.  The GCMCA directed his separation on 19961022.  Therefore, the Board found his discharge proper.  Relief denied.

The Applicant implies his discharge was inequitable because of his “Good conduct medal 961022” and meritorious mast.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by his desertion ended by apprehension.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the Marine Corps and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Additionally, for the edification of the Applicant, there is no evidence in the record that the Applicant was ever awarded a good conduct medal.  Relief 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.  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 18 Aug 95 until 30 Jan 97).

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

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

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