Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01428-10
Original file (01428-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TOR
Docket No: 1428-10
18 January 2011

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy

Ref: (a} 10 U.S.C. 1552

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments
(2) Case summary with advisory opinion
(3) Subject's naval record

1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former member of the Navy Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with this
Board requesting that her record be corrected to reflect
recharacterization of her other than honorable discharge of 2 May
1989,

2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Bourgeois, Butherus, and
Sproul, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 11 January 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the
Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy
Persouuel Command (Code Prue012), cated 13 December 2012, a copy

of which is attached to enclosure (2).

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as
follows:

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner,
it ig in the interest of justice to waive the statue of
limitations and review the application on its merits.

é
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of
active duty on 26 September 1985. On 29 January 1986 she was
honorably released from active duty and transferred to the Navy
Reserve upon the expiration of her term of active obligated
service.

d. On 30 January 1986, Petitioner was recalled to active duty
in the Ready Reserve. It appears that she served without
disciplinary incident. However, it also appears that she failed
to satisfactorily participate in the Ready Reserve. As such, she
was processed for an administrative separation under other than
honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation.
Nevertheless, on 2 May 1989, she was erroneously issued a Record
of Discharge from the U. S. Naval Reserve (Inactive) ({NAVPERS
1070/615) which reflected a characterization of service as
“honorable.”

e. In an advisory opinion from PERS-913 it was noted that the
record contained several administrative errors, and that although
Petitioner's record reflected contradictory information regarding
the characterization of her service, her request for an upgrade
was warranted. In this regard, the advisory opinion stated, in
part, as follows:

Gervicemembers currently being separated by reason of
unsatisfactory participation shall receive a characterization
of separation of as either honorable or general under
honorable conditions. Servicemembers currently being
separated for unsatisfactory participation “typically” receive
a characterization of discharge of general under honorable
conditions.

4

Given the lack of documentation substantiating superior
performance, PERS-913 is unable to support an honorable
characterization of service for separation.

CONCLUSION :

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. In this regard, the Board substantially concurs with the
comments and recommendations contained in the advisory opinion.
Specifically, the Board concludes that her record should be
corrected to reflect that she was administratively separated with
a general under honorable conditions characterization of service.
Based on the foregoing the Board concludes that no useful purpose
is served by continuing to show that Petitioner was processed for
separation under other than honorable conditions, and as such
finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting the

. following corrective action.

RECOMMENDATION :

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
on 2 May 1989 she was separated from the Navy Reserve with a
general under honorable conditions characterization of service
vice under other than honorable conditions on that same day.

b. That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.

c. That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be
informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board
on 2 October 2009.

4. Pureuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 723.6(c), it is certified that a quorum was
present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the

' foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's
proceedings in the above entitled matter.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN J.° GEORGE
Recorder Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6 (e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

\ eased

Executive racko

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301889

    Original file (ND1301889.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 March 2012, Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERS 913) directed NOSC Houston to discharge the Applicant with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service for Unsatisfactory Participation in the Ready Reserve with a Reenlistment Code of RE-4 (Not Recommended for Reenlistment) and a Separation Code of JHJ (No Board Entitlement). Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03652-10

    Original file (03652-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting recharacterization oO change of his narrative reason for separation and reenlistment code, and removal of all derogatory material from his record. On record reflects satisfactory parti med to be his failure to 16 July 2002, after what was presu continue participating in drills, an attempt was made, via mail, to notify him of pending...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09564-09

    Original file (09564-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to remove documentation showing he was separated from.the Navy Reserve for "unsatisfactory performance." The Board, consisting of Ms. LeBlanc and Messrs. Grover and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 7 January 2010, and pursuant to its regulations, determined...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08102-00

    Original file (08102-00.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Naval Reserve filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 26 May 1989. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that she was not discharged on 20 May 1989 but continued to serve on active duty until 22 September 1989 when she was released from active duty with her...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600389

    Original file (ND0600389.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I would like the board to please review my case and give me am upgrade of honorable and a reenlistment code of RE-1.Sincerely, (Applicant’s rank and signature) PO3 M_ R_ (Applicant) ” Issues as stated on an additional attached letter also dated December 4, 2005:I would like to respond to the statement of the commanding officer J. E. R_. 050318: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Reserve, Fort Worth, notified Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERS-913), that the Applicant was discharged on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11966-08

    Original file (11966-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX TRG WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 11966-08 19 March 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Sub}: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 0; ioe Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former member of the Navy Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he was not discharged on 23 May...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05249-08

    Original file (05249-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TUR Docket No: 5249-08 11 February 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD ORM Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that the characterization of her discharge be changed. Based on the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00840

    Original file (ND03-00840.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    And when I have requested that I would be terminated from the reserves it was not because I did not want to be a part of the navy I just didn’t see the point of me sitting around in the reserves. 860615: Acknowledged the policy change for excused drills.880907: Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested. ]890425: Letter of intent to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00557

    Original file (ND04-00557.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-QM3, USNR-R Docket No. Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01243-08

    Original file (01243-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former member of the Marine Corps Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that her record be corrected, in effect, to show that she was not discharged on 13 December 2009 under other than honorable conditions or reduced in grade to of lance corporal (LCpl; E-3), and that she was recommended for reenlistment. The Board, consisting of Mr. ae ve ie and Mr. ii reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice...