Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700670
Original file (ND0700670.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-SK3, USN
ND07-00670
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070420   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: PARENTHOOD OR CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILDREN        Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-124

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Enhance employment
                           2. Discharge not warranted by service record

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PARENTHOOD OR CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILDREN .
Date: 20 071205             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2 ( ). Per regulation, when the reason for separation is parenthood, characterization of service is honorable, unless an entry level separation (ELS) or general (under honorable conditions) is warranted. The Appli cant was not eligible for ELS. A general discharge is warranted when service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Board noted that the Applicant’s record contained no evidence of misconduct, that her only counseling was in reference her inability to comply with the Navy’s Family Care policy, that non-compliance does not equate to mandatory separation processing, that her final evaluation was favorable and her Commanding Officer made no mention of any negative aspects of her performance which would tend toward the characterization of service as something less than honorable. Further, the Board noted an error in the Applicant’s processing. First, she was counseled after being notified of separation processing rather than prior to with a reasonable opportunity to comply. Second, her notification indicated that general court-martial convening authority review of her proposed separation was “not applicable ” when she was entitled to such review. The Board determined that the Applicant was not prejudiced by these errors as a matter of propriety; however, these errors contributed to the Board’s concerns about the Applicant’s characterization of service. For all of these reasons, and especially in light of her credible service throughout her over 5 years of active duty, the Board determined that the appropriate characterization of the Applicant’s service was honorable.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19990813 - 19991004              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19991005      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20050127
Length of Service : 05 Yrs 03 Mths 23 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 55          Highest Rank /Rate : SK3
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )       Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )                   OTA: 3.50
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): LOC, NAVY "E", NDSM, M-11 MARKSMAN

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 20031015:        Applicant extended enlistment for 6 months (total aggregate 11 months), new EAS 20040904.
200 4 0 11 0:        Applicant’s dependent daughter born.

 20040406:        Applicant extended enlistment for 7 months (total aggregate 18 months), new EAS 20050404.

 20040419:        Applicant transferred and joined to USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71).

 20041 007 :        Applicant submits Family Care Plan Certificate indicating “Not Comply” on blocks 1 – 11.

20041 112 :        Retention Warning for non-compliance with DON Family Care Plan certificate and world-wide availability.
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20041111
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  2 00 41111
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                        * (See discussion of Issue 2 )
         GCMCA review                                * See discussion of Issue 2 )

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
Separation Authority (date):     CO, USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71) ( 20050120 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20050127

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:             Other Documentation (Describe)      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until 19 May 2005, Article 1910-124 (previously 3620215), Separation by reason of Convenience of the Government - Parenthood.

B. 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 V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .



ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000 . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.
Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD . ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.

Board Membership: 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700674

    Original file (ND0700674.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600007

    Original file (ND0600007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Four pages from Applicant’s service record High Honor award, Weber State University, Summer 2004-05 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00960

    Original file (ND02-00960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00960 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020624, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030214. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500373

    Original file (ND0500373.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AR, USN Docket No. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as submitted by the American Legion, which supersede the Applicant’s issue as submitted on his DD Form 293:Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (AMERICAN LEGION):1 (Equity Issue) This former member opines that family problems contributed to sufficiently extenuated his misconduct of record to warrant the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00936

    Original file (ND04-00936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “convenience of the government reenlistment code: RE-1.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. and RIR to E-3.960214: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and by reason of weight control failure with the least favorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500112

    Original file (ND0500112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Now currently disabled can’t support my family unless discharge is upgraded to allow me to receive the proper benefits and help I deserve.”The Applicant’s representative submitted no issues. 950619: Report of Return of Deserter: Applicant apprehended by military authorities at 0930, 950614, (119 days) at Salisbury, North Carolina.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09137-07

    Original file (09137-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. If the NDRB denies your request for recharacterization of the discharge, you may appeal that decision to this Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500295

    Original file (ND0500295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that his characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has met the standard of acceptable conduct and performance, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. The NDRB is not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01189

    Original file (ND03-01189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01015

    Original file (ND04-01015.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01015 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040610. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2) Letter from Applicant dated June 25, 2004 Letter from D_ W_, Corrections Social Worker, State of Wisconsin Department of Corrections dated June 22, 2004 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...