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

ex-AN, USN 
Docket No. ND03-01172

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030626.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests 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 20040617.  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: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “To Whom it may concern,

My name is A_ L_ M_ (Applicant), I am writing this letter in hopes that the committee overseeing this letter will generously upgrade my re-entry code in regards to my 0TH discharge.  The reason I am requesting this is, because I would like to further my career, and life in the military.

On the month of November of the year 2000, I went UA from the Navy Shipyard at Newport News.  The decision I made was uncalled for, and not military ways of doing things.  The reason I acted this way was first started in high school.  As a high school student ending my high school years, I was looking for a career, and trying to find what things interest me at the same time.  I visited a local Navy recruiting station in the city and state of Wilmington, Delaware.  While looking at the options of my life, and career in the military with the recruiter, I was then given an appointment to the local Meps.  The next day I went as instructed to Meps with a recruiter.  I stayed there all day, and passed all test given to me with flying colors.  The recruiters were astounded with all my test results when i returned from Meps the following day.  I was unclear about what branch I actually wanted to go into at the moment, because all i was doing was checking out my options.  Later in the months to come I decided to enroll in the Air Force instead, because my father was a veteran of that branch.  I went to the Navy recruiter, and told him my decision.  He went on saying that since I went to Meps for all the test and also passed them, that I am part of the Navy.  At the time I was clueless if this was right or wrong.  I thought this was true at the time.  So on the coming months I went to boot camp, and to my first duty station.  As I furthered my knowledge of the Navy itself, I found out that, what was told to me by my recruiter in the past was very untrue.  I was not part of the Navy until I swore in.  At the time I trusted, and believed my recruiter, and I did what I was told.  While in the Navy, the job I was signed up for wasnt really what wanted to do.  So that made it harder for me as a person dealing with that situation.

Over the next months, mentally I couldnt take being somewhere I didnt want to be.  At the same time I felt violated trust wise by a superior.  I couldnt fathime why he would lie to me, just to meet his quota.  After much thought, I walked away from the Navy.  While I was in the Military I was no trouble, and did excellent on all test, and was promoted quickly.  When I went back to the civilian life, I remained out of trouble, and found a job.  A little while later the stress of being a deserter was killing me mentally, and physically.  So oneday I went to the Norfolk base in Virginia, and turned myself in to the TPU unit there.  I stayed there for a month and a half to be discharged.  I recieved an OTH as a result of my actions, which was considerably generous of the Navy.

I am writing this letter so the committee overseeing this can in hopes upgrade my re-entry code so i can be a military personnel once again as hoped.  I want to further my education, career, and life in the military.  I also think personally I need to finish what I started, and make up for lost time.  Through all of this, I have seen that the military is where I am needed as a person.  The Navy Wasn’t for me, but another branch I could show them my strengths, and knowledge and hopefully become a good citizen of the U.S. military.  The person I am i need to be in the military, but my actions in the past, doesnt show that I know.  I want to prove to myself, family, and the military that I can do this, be part of a team, and feel the honor of helping my country.  I loved the enjoyment of the military when i was in it at the time on other occasions.

I am ending this letter leaving you with documents showing my case.  Thanks for your time, and I hope I can be a military personnel once again as dreamed.  Have a great day.

Sincerely,
A_ L_ M_ 1/5/2003”

Documentation

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

E-mail from Applicant to Chaplain, dated December 11, 2000
E-mail from Applicant to Chaplain, dated December 12, 2000
E-mail to Chaplain, dated December 22, 2000
Paper showing doctor’s appointment for Applicant
Rockford Center Referral/Recommendations for service, dated November 22, 200
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	990805 - 000712	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000713		Date of Discharge:  020813

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  05  10
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  11			AFQT:  Unknown

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  594**

*No marks found in service record.
**Extracted from DD Form 214, Block 29, Dates of Time Lost During This Period.

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:

020813:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106.

Applicant’s separation package missing from service record

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020813 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C) and, after a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

Issue 1:  The Applicant requested an administrative discharge to escape trial by court-martial.  While he may feel that his recruiter’s statements contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

 Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.   

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 21 Aug 2002, 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 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