Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900906
Original file (ND0900906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SK2, USNR
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090304
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19990729 - 20000611     Active:   20000612 - 20040617 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20040618     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050202      Highest Rank/Rate: SK2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 15 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 36
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:     
DD 214:         Service/ Medical Record:                  Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:                References:              
Additional Statements :
 From Applicant:        From Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 4 August 2005, MILPERSMAN Article 1910-158, SEPARATION BY REASON OF UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE

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 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Did not do “ anything bad to deserve a R E 4 c ode. ”
2. He w as not aware that paperwork was required when he stopped drilling.
3. Delayed resolution of discharge for personal matters.

Decision

Date: 20090810            Location: Washington D.C.        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE.
Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. 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. The Applicant ’s record of service reflects he had 11 unexcused absences between the period of 19 September 2004 and 12 December 2004. Per a Sworn Affidavit of Service by Mail signed on 21 December 2004, the original N otice of A dministrative S eparation P rocessing due to Unsatisfactory Participation in the Naval Reserve was mailed to the Applicant via certified mail. T he U.S. Postal Service Certified Mail Receipt was signed by a person other than the Applicant on 28 December 2004. The Commanding Officer’s (Naval and Marine Corps Reserve Center, Grand Rapids) lett er of 04 February 2005 indicated the Applicant was separated locally by reason of U nsatisfactory P articipation in the Ready Reserve as evidenced by his failure to maintain satisfactory drill participation and was awarded a characterization of service as General (Under Honorable Conditions).

 : (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends he did not do anything to deserve a RE 4 c ode and would possibly like to enlist again. an issue that the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraph concerning .

: (Decisonal) ( ) . The Applicant contends he did not know that paperwork was involved when he stopped drilling and he was told by the recruiter if he wanted to stop “just stop . ” Pursuant to the Navy Military Personnel Manual , section 1910-158, members may be separated when they acquire a t le a st 9 unexcused absences from scheduled training in a 12 month period, when they fail to keep the commanding officer advised of personal mobilization information, e tc. The evidence of record as discussed supra , indicates the Applicant met the requirements for separation due to Unsatisfactory Participation in the Ready Reserve bas ed on his 11 unexcused absences in a 12 month period . The Notice of Administrative Separation Processing was sent via certified mail to the Applicant at an address that is different from his current address. The Certified Mail Receipt was signed by someone other than the Applicant. Furthermore, there is no indication that the Notice of Administrative Separation Processing was signed by the Applicant and/or returned to his command. Nonetheless, t he Applicant had an obligation to keep his command advised of his current address and failure to do so could have resulted in his inability to receive the Notification of Administrative Separation Processing . Based on the foregoing , the NDRB determined the Applicant’s contention that he did not know paperwork was involved to be without merit . The NDRB also determined the contention that a recruiter told him to “just stop ” to be without merit based on the Applicant’s age , experience with the discharge process as evidenced by his prior active duty service, length of service and facts unique to this case.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant also contends he was a having marital problems and went through a divorce in 2005 . The re is no information in the record or p rovide d by the Applicant to prove he informed his chain of command of these family problems and was denied assistance, leave, or support. Additionally, the Applicant makes no mention of, nor provides documented proof, if he attempted to use any one of the numerous family support programs sponsored by or for military service members. These programs and services, such as Family Advocacy, Navy – Marine Corps Relief Society, Red Cross, the Chaplain, or even Navy medical health personnel if needed, all provide services to members of the military, regardless of grade, in times of need. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or he should not be held accountable for his actions.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reas on for separation shall remain U NSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE.
The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .



ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant
Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301166

    Original file (ND1301166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.Issue 2: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains eligible...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401009

    Original file (ND1401009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants to reenlist in the Navy reserve.2. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400916

    Original file (ND1400916.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901266

    Original file (ND0901266.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: REQUESTED, FINANCIAL HARDSHIP Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:NONE Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030731Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040614Highest Rank/Rate:OSSNLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)14 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 36EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900185

    Original file (ND0900185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Seeking RE Code changed for reenlistment purposes.2. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901805

    Original file (ND0901805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision Date: 20100415Location: Washington D.C.Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE.Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900077

    Original file (ND0900077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB strongly recommends the BCNR change the Applicant’s reentry code to “RE-1.” The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraph concerning , for further information regarding .After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the discharge was improper and not equitable. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901649

    Original file (MD0901649.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Reenlistment/RE-code : Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902097

    Original file (ND0902097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” The Applicant’s request to change his characterization of service to Uncharacterized is denied, because the Applicant’s service extended beyond 180 days.A letter of reference from STGC, who served in the same unit as the Applicant, however, seems to validate that the Applicant received bad advice. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • 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,...