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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-PCSN, USN
Docket No. ND05-00982

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050523.  The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051006.  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 and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I try to contact several people to find out where I was suppose to report.  I also report to the recruiting station.  So no one knew what to do.  I contact many people to find out if I could take my child with me.  I was never told where to report.  I when to two recruiting station and I was told they did not know where I was to report.  I also called Columbus and they didn’t have an answer.”

Documentation

Only the service record was reviewed.  The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USA	19981229 - 19990211	Unknown
	                USNR (DEP)	20000510 - 20000514	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20000515		Date of Discharge:  20030715

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  02  00
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:	243 days
	Confinement:			None

Age at Entry:  20

Years Contracted:  4 (12 month extension)

Education Level:  11				AFQT:  61

Highest Rate:  PCSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NA*				Behavior:  NA*		OTA:  NA*

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  None

* Not Available

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

000510:	Pre-service waiver for reenlistment code granted.

021017:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0001 on 021017.

030617:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 2017 on 030617 (244 days/surrendered).

030623:	Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: In that Postal Clerk Seaman A_ D. F_, U.S. Navy, Transient Personnel Unit, Great Lakes, IL, on active duty, did, on or about 0001, 17 October 2002 without authority, absent herself from her organization, to wit: Naval Air Station, located at Sigonella, Italy, and did remain so absent until on or about 2017, 17 June 2003.

030623:	Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  She waived her right to consult with counsel.  The Applicant stated she understood the elements of the offense with which she was charged, and admitted she was guilty of all charge preferred against her.  Specifically, she admitted to violating UCMJ, Article 86:  In that she did, on or about 0001, 17 October 2002 without authority, absent herself from her organization, to wit: Naval Air Station, located at Sigonella, Italy, and did remain so absent until on or about 2017, 17 June 2003.  The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive her of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon her current enlistment, and that she 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.

030626:	The Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit, Great Lakes, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed Applicant’s discharge.

Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030715 in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

In a signed statement, the Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive her of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that she 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 she understood the elements of the offenses with which she was charged.  She admitted he was guilty of violating Article 86:  unauthorized absence from 20021017 through 20030617, a period of 243 days.  Under applicable regulations, a violation of UCMJ Article 86, unauthorized absence for a period more than 30 days is considered a serious offense.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her 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 her characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends that despite contact with military authorities during her unauthorized absence, she had did not know where to report.  The Applicant’s issue is without merit.  A servicemember, subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, has a legal obligation to report for their required military duty.  In her request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, the Applicant admitted she was UA from her place of duty, Sigonella, Italy.  By virtue of this admission, the Applicant was clearly aware that her place of duty was Sigonella, Italy and that her absence from duty was unauthorized.  Thus, the Applicant’s contention that she did not know where to report is simply not credible.  Relief is not warranted.  

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.  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.

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.  

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