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

 ex-CECN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00335

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020128, 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 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  To the Board,
At the time of my desertion from the Navy I under went a lot of problems.  As you may already know I received an America Red Cross message about my grandmother having a stroke she lost use of  her left side.  She was like my mother so I took it kind of hard.  I soon went home and she was worst than the message said I felt I couldn't leave her like that until I knew she would never be alone with my Aunt again so time went by & know she is in a nursing home being care for 24 hrs a day.  She is in Sun Breeze Care & Rehab, 1350 14th Ave SE Decatur, AL 35601, & her name is D_ W_.  I knew I was wrong for deserting the Navy & I would have taken any punishment the Navy has given me.  Now my family life is back in order & I know life goes on & that I was a sailor 1st & family man 2nd, I would like another chance.  The only way I could have another chance is that if God willing to make you see fit to change my Discharge.  I wasn't a problem sailor no NJP's or court-martials I also had good evals.  Please review my record & give me a fair chance to get my life back on track, so I can move on.  Thanks.

Documentation

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

Recommendation for Disposition from Discipline Officer, TPU, Norfolk

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	970115 - 970128	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970129		Date of Discharge:  010427

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  07  23
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  46

Highest Rate:  CECN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.75 (4)	Behavior:  3.75 (4)		OTA:  3.37 (5.0 Evals)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  47 

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 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970124	Mother (P_ W_) designated in Record of Emergency Data.

971110	Son (A_ T_), Mother (P_ W_), and Sister (C_ W_) designated as beneficiaries on SGLI.

000108	Applicant reported for duty Naval Air Station Keflavik, Iceland.

000917:	Report of Declaration of Deserter (NAVPERS 1600-3).  Applicant declared a deserter on 000917 having been an unauthorized absentee since 2359, 000819 from U.S. Naval Air Station Keflavik, Iceland, UIC 63032.

010323	Applicant returned from UA.  TEMDU TPU Norfolk, VA

010412	Recommendation for disposition from TPU.  Process (Applicant) for OTH in Lieu of Trail by Court-Martial.  Executive Officer Comment’s:  Too bad, good evals…(Applicant) doesn’t want to stay Navy.

010427	Applicant acknowledged not eligible for reenlistment due to [separation] in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 010427 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a 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 desires to have his discharge changed and would like another chance to be a sailor.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reenstatement into the Navy or Marine Corps.  However, the NDRB under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge will change a discharge if such a change is warranted.  The Applicant was in an unauthorized absence status for greater than 30 days.  This conduct is triable by court-martial, the Applicant voluntarily chose to be separated with an other than honorable discharge instead of going to trial.  The record is devoid of any evidence that the Applicant’s grandmother was in loco parentis.  The Applicant is fully responsible for his actions and must accept the consequences of his misconduct.  Relief 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 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.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 
11 Jul 2000 until Present, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650), SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B.  A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article [e.g., 86, unauthorized absence for a period more than 30 days] upon conviction by a Special or General Court-Martial, in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial.

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