Author: CAP
Last saved by: shirley.robertson
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND03-01142

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

ex-DCFR, USN
Docket No. ND03-01142

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030618.  The Applicant requests the 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040608.  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/Separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 29, Dates of Time Lost During This Period, should read:  "90MAY16-90JUN20; 90JUL20-91MAY11" vice "TL:  90MAY16-90JUN19; 90JUL22-91MAY10."  The Commander, Naval Personnel Command, Millington, TN, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I was ordered to pay child support, and was sued six times while onboard & on duty.  My pay records where in a terrible mess and I was not being paid all my money was being taken I did not even receive the one dollar a day pay promised.  Most of the time I could stay onboard and have something to eat regularly and a washing machine for clean clothes.  After the USS Lawrence decommissioned, I was living the life of a poor dockside bum, looking forward to being transferred, and was later, in the meantime I left went UA to find work.  I was tired of being hungry and bumming around.  That when I returned messed up my pay status even more, and the second time I went U.A. from the USS MANTTWOC I was eating well and living onboard, with no place to go.  Onboard on duty was out motto and I was – working my hardest long hours until I could no longer maintain a good attitude towards my work and duties.  While all the time talking to everyone I could about my pay status and my degrading attitude.  That was starting to worsen as time went by I felt hopeless and lost but I am strong willed and walked away for the last time to find work outside Navy property.  I feal my circumstance, and poor choices where a direct effect of when I was given no pay whatsoever and was hungry in dirty clothes, even prisoners have regular meals.  The day of my discharge I was informed that I owed the Navy $3,392.16

Documentation

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

Letter to Legal Services of Eastern Oklahoma Inc, dated February 8, 1990
Order modifying decree of divorce, filed February 7, 1990
Letter from Department of the Navy, Navy Family Allowance Activity, dated June 1, 1990 (2)
Letter from Defense Finance and Accounting Service, dated November 2, 1992
Letter to Applicant from ex-wife’s attorney, dated December 6, 1989
Message from NAVFMALWACT, dated October 13, 1989
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	881101 - 890125	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  890126		Date of Discharge:  910702

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  06  14
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  71

Highest Rate:  DCFA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.60 (1)	Behavior:  3.80 (1)		OTA:  3.60

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR, AFEM, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  325

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

890504:	Psychology evaluation: Dx: Adjustment disorder with depressed mood.  Recommendation: Fit for full duty, returned to same.  May require counseling if he is unable to adapt to military service.

900516:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 900516.

900616:	Applicant declared a deserter.

900620:	Applicant apprehended by civilian authorities at 1830, 900620 and returned to military control 1935, 900620 (35 days/apprehended).

900622:	Applicant notified command (USS MANITOWOC (SLT-1180)) will be deploying on 900625.

900709:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to DCFR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900722:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 1800, 900722.

900822:	Applicant declared a deserter.

910511:	Applicant apprehended by civilian authorities at 1920, 910511 and returned to military control 1953, 910511 (292 days/apprehended).

910702:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Applicant’s separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19910702 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C) and, after a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

Issue 1.  The Applicant requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial.  In the request the Applicant noted that his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he was guilty of the offenses.  He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service could be under other than honorable conditions.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence relating 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 15560A), Change 7, effective 
25 May 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR 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 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 “afls14.jag.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:

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

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX: