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

  
ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00575

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040224.  The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list a representative on his DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041015.  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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “My ability to serve was impaired by my youth and immaturity.”

Documentation

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

Character Reference Letter dated February 8, 2004
Copies of DD Form 214 (3 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR (J)		760220 - 760226	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  760227		Date of Discharge:  011121

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:   25  08  25  (Doesn’t exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  54

Highest Rank:  PFC			MOS:  0311, Infantry Rifleman

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.2 (2)			Conduct:  4.3 (2)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  9011

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

770104:	To UA 

770104	Dropped and declared deserter.

770418:	Joined MARBKS NTS KEYPORT WA from desertion 1300, 770418.

770418:	To emergency leave.

770428:	From emergency leave.

770429:	To UA.

770528:	Declared a deserter.

790124:	Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86; Charge I: In that PFC O__ L. H___, U.S Marine Corps, Marine Barracks, Naval Torpedo Station, Keyport, Washington 98345, did, on or about 770104, without authority, absent himself from his unit, to wit: Marine Barracks, Naval Torpedo Station, located at Keyport, Washington, and did remain so absent until on or about 770418; Charge II: In that PFC O__ L. H___, U.S Marine Corps, Marine Barracks, Naval Supply Base, Bangor, Bremerton, Washington , and did remain so absent in desertion.

010917:	From UA. 

010918:	Joined SCTYBN MCB QUANTICO VA for duty.

010918:	Apprehended (IHCA) from 010918 to 010926.
		
010927:	Delivered under GD.

010928:	Applicant apprehended by civil authorities on 910918 (1800) at Dallas, Police Department, Dallas, TX.  Returned to military control 010927.  Retained.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20011121 under other than honorable conditions 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:  A service characterization of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a United States Marine.  The Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request.  The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veteran’s benefits based upon his current enlistment.  He also understood he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received there from may have a bearing.  The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged.  He admitted he was guilty of violating Article 86:  unauthorized absence.  The Board found the Applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  While he may feel his immaturity and youth were factors contributing to his actions, the record clearly reflects his disregard for the requirements of military discipline, while demonstrating he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of any evidence the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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 P1900.16F), effective 
01 September 2001 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.  

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