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

 ex-FN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00636

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020408, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  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 030124.  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.  Dear Congress,

The reason I have received the discharge that I have was do to me not thinking that I was not being treated justly or the same as others in my shop.

The reason I request a upgrade is because I would like to be able to take care of my new born child and my loving wife.  I would just like to be giving a chance to make good on all of my promises that I made to the government and the military.  I would like to Rejoin the military into the United States Air Force.  Please consider my request to make good or 2 promise one I made to the military and the other Ii made to my family.  Thank you.

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant, undated
Letter from Applicant, undated
Seven pages from Applicant's service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	000731 - 000919	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000920		Date of Discharge:  011030

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  01  10 Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  9 GED		AFQT:  46

Highest Rate:  FN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA		Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  190

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:

010209:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 9 Feb 01.

010212:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 12 Feb 01 (3 days/surrendered).

010213:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 13 Feb 01.

010214:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0010, 14 Feb 01.

010220:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 20 Feb 01.

010305:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 5 Mar 01 (13 days/surrendered).

010313:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 14 Mar 01

010314:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0715, 14 Mar 01 (1 days/surrendered).

010326:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 26 Mar 01.

010327:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0715, 27 Mar 01 (1 day/surrendered).

011004:	Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence (UA) from 0715, 17 Apr 01 until 2200, 2 Oct 01 (168 days/surrendered).

011004:	Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request.  The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offense(s) with which he was charged, and admitted he was guilty of all the charges preferred against him.  Specifically, he admitted to violating UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence (UA) from 0715, 17 Apr 01 until 2200, 2 Oct 01 (168 days/surrendered).  The Applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing

011012:	The commanding officer, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed Applicant’s discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 011030 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).

Responding to the Applicant’s issues , the NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to ensure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that most members of the Navy serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  The NDRB agrees the Applicant's service was equitably characterized based on a total of 168 days of unauthorized absence.  The Applicant requested an administrative discharge in lieu of trial by courts-martial and was appropriately discharged from the Naval service. There is no evidence of impropriety, inequity or procedural irregularities in the Applicant's discharge.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review can be considered.  Examples include documentation such as educational pursuits, verifiable employment record(s), documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  At this time, the applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief will be granted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his 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