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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-ATAR, USN
Docket No. ND05-01058

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050606.  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 20051117.  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 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I am making this request to allow for my reentry into the military service. I realize now as an adult that my actions while enlisted where overruled by my parents misguided teachings. As the son of an army drop out I had poor role models influencing my decisions. I have in the following years, had the time to rethink my actions and to sever my ties to my unruly family. I am currently attending college at the University of Akron in their department of Radiological technology and am hoping that my skills could be put to use in the service of my country.

I do realize that as a young man of only 18 years of age I was easily influenced by my parents and that I gave into their will when in fact I should have stood firm in my commitment to both my government and my country. I have spent years regretting my actions and have come to realize that I was not accomplishing anything by giving into my parent’s wishes; in fact I was letting down my country. I realize that I am incapable of changing what occurred in the past, but have made every effort to learn from my mistakes and to become a better person.

I am submitting this request to change my current discharge status so that I might rectify my poor service by reenlisting and serving with dignity, honor and respect, characteristics which were not present in my youth. I do feel that I was very immature at the time of my enlistment and that this combined with the firm rule that my parents had over me, were the factors which cased me to fail in my duty. By going AWOL, I thought in my head that I would be able to make my family happy with me.

This action should show you how naive I was and demonstrate the type of misguided beliefs I once held. I had no previous issues during my time of service prior to this event and in fact felt that before my family began to dissuade me that I was in fact a fine sailor. In closing I request that you view my actions as those of a misguided youth, whom was too immature to handle the duties to which he was obligated due to the misguidance of my family. I thank you for your time.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s undergraduate grades (2 pages)
The National Society of Collegiate Scholars, dtd May 3, 2005
Certificate of completion of Orkin Basic Pest Control Technician Certification Course, dtd May 22, 2003
Certificate of completion of Papa John’s Management Training Program, undtd
Certificate of completion of Wendy’s Basics Program, dtd December 3, 1999
Letter of commendation, dtd October 30, 1997
Travel Certificate, Separation without orders, dtd July 30, 1998
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19970307 - 19970828	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19970829		Date of Discharge:  19980803

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  05  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:	Unable to determine
	Confinement:			None

Age at Entry:  18

Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  76

Highest Rate:  ATAA

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/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

980520:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0700 on 980520.

980521:	Report of Declaration of Deserter:  Applicant declared a deserter 980520 having been in an unauthorized absence status since 980520.

980625:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 85:  Desertion.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $463.05 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980803:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.
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 19980803 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).

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.  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 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for a violation of UCMJ Article 85, desertion.  Under applicable regulations, a violation of UCMJ Article 85 is considered a serious offense.  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 discharge was inequitable because of his youth and immaturity at the time of service.  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 most servicemembers begin their service at a relatively young age.  It must further be noted that despite their relative youth and immaturity, the vast majority of these members of the Navy still 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 undergraduate grade reports and letter of admission into the National Society of College Scholars.  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 NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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), Change 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 85, desertion.

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