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

ex-SM3, USN 
Docket No. ND04-00659

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040311.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reentry code changed so that he may reenlist.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary 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/Separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I am writing to you to request a change on my DD214.  The change that I am requesting is an upgrade on my, “Character of Service and Reentry Code”.

This request is being humbly made, given the circumstances surrounding my discharge.  Nun the less I would like to have these changes made so that I might reenter the Navy and finish out my tour of service honorably until retirement.  Given my age and lack of maturity at the time of my discharge in 1991, I now feel that I have made a grave error in deciding to leave the service.

As we all do, I have come to a point in my life where self evaluation of my past, and the decisions I have made, have brought me to the point I am at today.  It is through this process that I have come to realize that my decision to leave the Navy was not only a poor decision but a damaging one.  Not just to me, but to my country, family, and friends who all depended on my oath to “protect them from all enemies, both forin and domestic”.  The events of our country’s recent past are tragic to be sure, yet have rekindled my feelings of patriotism and duty to my country.  It is this reason that I feel the overwhelming need to complete my tour of duty, and finish serving my country with dignity, honor, and courage that are in accordance with the highest of Naval standards.

In great haste, and lack of maturity, I requested a discharge of OTH in lieu of trial by court martial.  I was anticipating in my own mind, the worst punishment for destruction of government property.  So I sighted, “beyond irreconcilable differences”, to evade what would have turned out to be, I sure now, very mild punishment.  For several years’ now I have held this decision with great regret, and truly wish I would have stayed in the Navy and completed a full 20 year’s service.

The event’s of indiscretion that led me to disciplinary action, is met with great humility and disappointment within myself.  It started with and was driven by an episode of heavy drinking.  I was not a heavy drinker nor could I hold my liquor very well.

My ship was in dry dock at Hunters Point San Francisco, Ca.  We had been working very hard for several weeks when some of my shipmates suggested that we blow of some steam that afternoon.  With out hesitation I agreed to join them.  What started off as a few, seemingly innocent beers, turned into a drunken free for all.  Thus, in a state of drunkenness, and peer pressure I fallowed the group into an abandoned building on the base.  Needless to say, the events to fallow led all of us into a peck of trouble that none of us seamed to be concerned with in our drunken state.  And although we were all outstanding sailors who would have never considered doing such things in a sober state, and we all rose to the regret of our actions.

I deeply regret my actions and decisions of the past.  I have made many changes in my life and matured a great deal since then.  I no longer drink alcohol and I am very determined to finish my Naval career.  Please find it possible to accept me back.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR-R		860127 - 891128	HON
		    USNR (DEP)	891129 - 900306	COG
	Active:    USN			860214 - 890215	HON, Rel Acdu

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900307		Date of Discharge:  910215

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  09  26  (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  00  10  01

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  40

Highest Rate:  SM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  3.00 (1)		OTA:  3.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NER (2), SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  42

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

901202:	Applicant to UA on this date.

901210:	Report of Declaration of Deserter:  Applicant declared a deserter this date having been UA since 901202.

910113:	Applicant surrendered from UA on this date.

910114:	Report of Return of Deserter:  Applicant surrendered to military control on 910113.

910206:	Commander, Combat Logistics Group ONE, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions.

Complete discharge package unavailable

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19910215 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).  The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (E).

Issue 1:  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by an unauthorized absence for a period of 42 days.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

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.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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 civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  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 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 15560A), Change 7, effective 
25 May 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR 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 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.

E.  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.  

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