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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

   ex-MM3, USN
Docket No. ND05-00294

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20041210.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  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 20050727.  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:

“In FEB 2003, I was stationed at NWS Charleston, SC.  During this time I fell into a depression and made an attempt to hurt myself.  I feel very little was done on my command’s part to help me, as they decided to assign me to New Jersey after I received basic treatment with no change of my condition, I felt I felt no other option but to take unauthorized absence.  I do no use this as an excuse for what I did, but I feel I deserve an upgrade in discharge. I currently have an OTH discharge and cannot find a good job to help bring my life back on track.  My only evidence is my medical record my command at NWS Charleston was DTP (transition personnel) at NNPTC.”

Documentation

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

No documents were submitted by the Applicant.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	010618 - 010808	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010809		Date of Discharge:  040429

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01 11 21
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (24 month extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  79

Highest Rate:  MM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (3)		Behavior:  3.00 (3)		OTA:  3.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  271

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:

030207	Applicant referred to NH Psychology Clinic by Naval Weapon Station Branch Clinic for evaluation for continued Naval Service and/or the Nuclear Power Program, after his release from Palemetto Hospital for suicidal Ideation. (1 week observation).
030212	Applicant found Not Physically Qualified (NPQ) for Nuclear Power Program and Submarines due to suicide ideation. Applicant found fit for full duty, re-assignment and transfer.

030401	Applicant found fit for sea duty by NNPTC UNDERSEA MEDICINE CLINIC.

030429	Re-evaluation found Applicant Not Physically Qualified (NPQ) until further evaluation by Neurology clinic.

030501	Applicant evaluated at Naval Hospital Charleston SC by LCDR T_ USN, MC. Applicant diagnosed with a mild form of Tourette’s Syndrome. LCDR T_ stated symptoms would not interfere with performance of duties. Applicant declined therapy.
 
030717:	Applicant UA from USS DETROIT (AOE-4) Earle, NJ since 0715, 030717.

040413:	Applicant apprehended by civil authority at San Antonio, TX at 1130, 040413. Returned to military control at Navy Absentee Collection and Information Center (NACIC) Great Lakes, IL at 1130, 040413. Transferred to TPU GLAKES IL.

040416:	Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Did on or about 0715, 030717 without authority, absent himself from his organization, to wit: USS DETROIT (AOE-4) located at Earle, New Jersey, and did remain so absent until on or about 1130, 040413.

040416:	Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  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: Did on or about 0715, 030717 without authority, absent himself from his organization, to wit: USS DETROIT (AOE-4) located at Earle, New Jersey, and did remain so absent until on or about 1130, 040413.  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.

040419:	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 20040429 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and 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 states that he had no choice but to go UA because of his depression and his command’s failure to help him with his medical condition. The Board found that in a signed statement on 20040416, the 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 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 from there may have a bearing. On 20040416 the Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged and admitted he was guilty of violating UCMJ Article 86: (Absent without authority) from the USS Detroit (AOE-4) from 030717 to 040413. While he may feel that his medical condition, command indifference, and perceived lack of treatment were factors that contributed to his actions, the evidence shows that the Applicant was evaluated at his command’s request by competent medical authorities (20030501) and prescribed a treatment plan that the Applicant refused. The Board found no evidence to support the Applicant’s contention that he was denied proper medical care for his condition while on active duty, or that he was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The applicant’s record however does reflect the Applicant’s disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. Therefore, relief on this basis is 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 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 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 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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023