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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND05-00736

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050330.  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 20050811.  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:

“To whom it may concern,

On August 18, 2003, I E_ M_ C_ , Jr. (Applicant) was declared a deserter from the United States Navy.  I deserted the USS Yorktown after returning to homeport in Pascagoula, MS.  At that time, my actions were taken from my present feelings of anger, dissatisfaction, and low self-esteem and prior unresolved family, medical and personal issues that happened before joining the Navy.  I sought help from counselors before joining but I felt like they were not addressing my problems so I stopped going and tried to figure things out on my own.  I believed that if I could just get away from my surroundings that would be my fast step to solving my problems.

Soon after I left my ship, I realized that my actions were inappropriate and they exemplified very poor judgment.  Before deserting, I again sought help from the Fleet and Family Support Service where I expressed my failure to adjust to the military standards.  The counselor tried to explain to me that I was not alone; that several others had expressed those same feelings but once again, I felt that they too, were unhelpful.

Last year, I completed 12-weeks of personal strengthening, nurturing and character building sessions in the Focusing on the Family, family enrichment program at Triumph MB Church.  I also joined a men’s support group where we meet every Thursday night at the church.  Both the family enrichment program and the support group have been instrumental in helping me face my prior military problems.  I am currently enrolled in Hinds Community College as a Drafting Major where I hold a 2.74 grade point average.  I am employed at the Ameristar Casino Hotel as a Valet attendant where I have recently been promoted and made employee of the month.

Sincerely,

E_ M_ C_ (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Character reference from Triumph Missionary Baptist Church, Senior Pastor, dated March 1, 2005
Hinds Community College official transcript

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	020405 - 020724	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  020725		Date of Discharge:  040708

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  11  14	(Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (12 month extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  46

Highest Rate:  SN

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:  Navy “E” Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  305

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:

030818:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0745 on 030818.

040618:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1050 on 040618 (305 days/surrendered).

040622:	Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0730, 030818 to 1050, 040618.

040622:	Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  He waived his right to consult with counsel.  The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offense with which he was charged, and admitted he was guilty of the charge preferred against him.  Specifically, he admitted to violating UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence from 0730, 030818 to 1050, 040618.  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.

040622:	The Commanding Officer, 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 20040708 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).

Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  In a signed statement, the Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  He voluntarily waived his right to consult with counsel.  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.  The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged.  He admitted he was guilty of violating Article 86:  Unauthorized absence from 0730, 030818 to 1050, 040618.  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.  Such conduct falls far short of that expected of a member of the U.S. military and does not meet the requirements for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of anger, dissatisfaction, and low self-esteem resulting from unresolved family, medical and personal issues.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that many members of the Navy endure hardships similar to those of the Applicant.  It must further be noted that the vast majority of those members do not commit misconduct as a result of their problems.  Despite their hardships, these sailors are still able to 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 found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized.  Relief denied.

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 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 could be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Board received and considered all of the Applicant’s submissions, including his letter of recommendation and his college transcript.  After careful consideration, the Board concluded the Applicant’s post-service achievements have been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service.  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 any additional 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