Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901857
Original file (ND0901857.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BU3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090617
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20020919 - 20030601     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030602     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070309      Highest Rank/Rate: BU3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 54
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20030603 :       For failure to disclose required basic enlistment eligibility information: shoplifting (value less than $500.00), 6/87, Gladstone, MO, 2 years on trespassing on K-mart property, paid $70.00.

- 2006112 8 :       For failure to be in compliance with the Department of the Navy Family Care Plan Program.

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 /To Representat ion :            From /To Congress m ember :         
Oth er Documentation :   


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. In-service record warrants an upgrade .

Decision

Date: 20 10 0506             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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 discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included two NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, but no evidence of misconduct that resulted in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. Per his letter dated 26 January 2007, the Commander, THIRTY-FIRST Seabee Readiness Group, stated that after the Applicant’s son was born on 10 November 2006, she and her husband refused to comply with the Department of the Navy Family Care Certificate and she refused to allow anyone to care for her child during normal working hours. Based on her noncompliance with the family care certificate, her command administratively processed her for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived her right to consult with a qualified counsel, but elected to submit a written statement. The NDRB did not find a copy of her statement in her record.

 Issue 1 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she was an upstanding member of the military, her evaluations were all excellent (her last one was 4.0) , was never on restriction, and could always be counted on to supervise a team or get the job done well. A ll Navy personnel on active duty must be ready to deploy throughout the world on short notice and be able to fully execute their military duties. As noted above, the Applicant and her husband refused to comply with the Navy Family Care Certificate and she refused to allow anyone to care for her child during normal working hours. There was no evidence in her record, nor did t he Applicant provide any documentation or statement , explaining her child care difficulties and that she had exhausted every means possible with immediate family members and the Family Services Center to be in compliance. The NDRB found the Applicant’s last evaluation report, which rated her 3.0 and not 4.0 as claimed. Based on the evidence of record, the NDRB determined the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

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 reason for separation shall remain .

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 .

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 14, effective 29 March 2006 until Present, Article 1910-124, 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 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 Disabled American 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 their 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500203

    Original file (ND1500203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .By a vote of the Reenlistment Code 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000890

    Original file (ND1000890.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Since the NDRB is not authorized to change it to this narrative reason for separation, the Board determined that a change to “Secretarial Authority” would be more appropriate than “Parenthood.” The NDRB determined that relief is warranted on both the characterization of service and the narrative reason of separation.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801040

    Original file (ND0801040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, it was noted in the service record on DD Form 1966, Record of Military Processing, dated April 2004, the Applicant already had anestablished history of “ refusing to ship ” as documented in her record;commentscontained on the DD Form 1966 state “ DEP discharged from Navy 031204;Refused to ship.” However, based on the lack of documented evidence to support the Applicant’s claim of a hardship discharge and/or approved leave, the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate....

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801085

    Original file (ND0801085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20001117 - 20010108Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010109Period of Enlistment: Years12 Months ExtensionDate of Discharge:20040623Length of Service: Yrs Months15 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 58Highest Rank/Rate:BU3EvaluationMarks:Performance: 4.0 (3) Behavior:3.0 (3)OTA: 3.48Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Types of...

  • 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 | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100099

    Original file (ND1100099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: NONE 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801937

    Original file (ND0801937.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300710

    Original file (ND1300710.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200154

    Original file (ND1200154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800578

    Original file (ND0800578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...