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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-RMSA, USN
Docket No. ND06-00600

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060227.  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 20070110.  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 a trial by court-martial.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“-I J_ L_ R_(Applicant) respectfully request permission to be given a chance to have my discharge upgraded to a General under honorable conditions.
-I am currently in college and in the Illinois National Guard and I am currently going for Officer Candidate School and this previous discharge may prohibate my commission.
-I would greatfully appreciate an opportunity to redeem myself for a young man’s childish mistake.  I am going on 28 yrs. old and for a long time have realized my mistake.”

Documentation

In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) (2)
Applicant’s college transcripts, dtd October 3, 2005 (2 pages)
Applicant’s Sailor/Marine, American Council on Education, Registry Transcript, dtd January 30, 2005 (2 pages)
Applicant’s Army/Ace Registry Transcript System, issued October 1, 2005 (2 pages)
Applicant’s NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, undated (2)
Applicant’s Department of Military Affairs, orders, dtd November 15, 2005 (2)
Applicant’s Army National Guard Retirement Point History Statement, dtd November 16, 2005 (2)
Applicant’s Enlistment Document for the Army National Guard, dtd December 9, 2005 (2 pages)
Applicant’s statement, dtd October 14, 2004
Applicant’s National Guard Waiver Workflow Notification, dtd November 9, 2004
One page from Applicant’s service record
Applicant’s Enlistment Document for the Army National Guard, dtd November 16, 2004
Applicant’s High School Diploma, dtd May 1996
Applicant’s Sailor/Marine, American Council on Education, Registry Transcript, dtd October 1, 2005 (2 pages)
Applicant’s birth certificate
Applicant’s Certificate of Completion of Warrior Transition, dtd July 19, 2005
Applicant’s Certificate of Completion of Army National Guard Defensive Driving Course, dtd December 11, 2004
Applicant’s Sales Award for “Most Incoming and Outing Wires”, dtd March 10, 2005
Applicant’ statement of service, dtd January 7, 2005
Applicant’s Certificate in recognition of Exemplary Performance, dtd Spring 2005
Letter to Applicant from J_ M_, Dean of the College, Springfield College in Illinois, dtd January 12, 2004
Letter to Applicant from J_ M_, Dean of the College, Springfield College in Illinois, dtd June 8, 2004
Applicant’s Individual Training Record, undated (2 pages)
Applicant’s transcript, dtd March 3, 2006 (2 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19970929 - 19991124	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19970929		Date of Discharge:  19991124

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  01  16  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  417 days
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  19

Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  66

Highest Rate:  RMSA

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: 

980801:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0800 on 980801.

980901:	Applicant declared a deserter.

990922:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1800 on 990922 (417 days/surrendered).  EAOS changed to 021119.

991008:	Applicant found medically qualified for separation.

991028:	Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 85:  In that Radioman Seaman Apprentice J_ L. R_, U.S. Navy, Transient Personnel Unit Puget Sound, on active duty, did, on or about 980801, without authority and with intent to remain away, therefrom permanently, absent himself from his unit, to wit: USS BELLEAU WOOD (LHA 3), located at Sasebo, Japan, and did remain so absent in desertion until on or about 990922.

991115:	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 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.  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.  

991118:	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 19991124 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 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 is requesting a discharge characterization upgrade to general.  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.  A general 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 violations of Articles 85 (Desertion) and 86 (Absence without leave more than 30 days) of the UCMJ.  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.

The Applicant is requesting an upgrade to his discharge characterization so that he can attend Officer Candidate School.  The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  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 the Applicant’s case.  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 should 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.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.  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 additional evidence related to this 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), Change 18, effective 
12 Dec 1997 until 10 July 2000, 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 [e.g., 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