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

 
ex-AKAN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00046

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 001016, 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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010329.  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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I acted solely on the advice of my counsel to accept an other than honorable discharge.

2.  My prior Honorable Discharge and Honorable Service was not considered at the time.  In 15 years of Service I had no Blemishes on my Record.

3.  I was set-up by the Navy for a conviction in this matter (NAF DETRIOT).

Documentation

The following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copies of DD Form 214 (2)
Letter from Applicant (3pgs)
Copy of Navy Battle"E" Authority Letter
Copy of Certificate of Completion (Maintenance Material Control Course)
Copy of Certificate of Completion (Instructor Basic Course)
Copy of Certificate of Completion (Hazardous Material Awareness Course)
Copy of Certificate of Completion (UADPS-SP (Disk Oriented Supply System)
Copy of Military Paychecks/PDQ Slip Authorization
Copy of PO2 Authority Letter
Copy of Crossing the Equator Certification Letter
Copy of Certificate of Completion (Aeronautical Technical Publications Library Management (DD-555-0007))
Copy of Certificate of Completion (A-500-0034 Leadership Management Education and Training for E4-E5 Personnel
Copy of Certificate of Award (Travel Agent) 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			780926 - 840903	HON
		   USN			840904 - 900717	HON
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	780726 - 780925	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900718		Date of Discharge:  931105

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  03  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  56

Highest Rate:  AK2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.90 (4)	Behavior:  3.60 (4)		OTA:  3.75

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NEM, SSDR (2ND), GCM (3RD), NUC, NDSM, BATTLE"E" (2ND) 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

900718:	Reenlisted at NAF DETROIT MI for 4 years.

931105:	Applicant acknowledged being assigned a restrictive reenlistment code (RE) Code of RE-4 because of his request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 931105 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A).  Although the discharge package is missing, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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’s first issue states:  “I acted solely on the advice of my counsel to accept an other than honorable discharge.”  The Board does not find this issue decisional.  The applicant exercised his rights in consulting counsel.  There is no evidence that the applicant was coerced into accepting a discharge in lieu of court martial.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s second issue states:  “My prior Honorable Discharge and Honorable Service was not considered at the time.  In 15 years of Service I had no Blemishes on my Record.”  The only service the discharge authority may consider is the current enlistment.  Therefore, the NDRB found no impropriety or inequity in the applicant’s character of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s third issue states:  “I was set-up by the Navy for a conviction in this matter (NAF DETRIOT).”  The NDRB found nothing in the record to support this issue.  The applicant failed to provide any documentation to support this issue.  Relief is denied.  

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5, effective 
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT‑MARTIAL. 

B.  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.  

C.  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.

D.  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