Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000382

Original file (ND1000382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HM3, USN-R

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091108

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:       REQUESTED, BUT NOT SPECIFIED

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         NONE              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19960130     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040322      Highest Rank/Rate: HM3
Length of Service:
         Inactive:        Year(s) Month(s) 05 D ay(s)
         Active   Year(s) Month(s) 1 8 D ay(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 91
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.58

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      WITH “M” DEVICE NRMSM (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

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:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation :          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

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. The Applicant contends that narrative reason for separation is inequitable , because she completed her obligation .

Decision

Date: 20110120 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 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 evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety . The Applicant’s record of service contained no documenta tion of sub standard performance or misconduct in her record. Based on the Applicant ’s failure to drill from January 2004 to March 2004 , command administratively processed for separation due to Unsatisfactory Drill Participation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant exercised or waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, and to request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that the narrative reason for separation is inequitable , because she served her time. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case , th e NDRB opined that there was a possible disconnect between Navy Personnel Command and the Applicant’s Reserve Unit. The Applicant enlisted 30 January 1996 for 8 years in the Naval Reserve. On 11 March 2003, the Applicant extend ed her enlistment for 3 months , changing her end of obligated service to 29 April 2004. The Applicant served in an active capacity from 1 March 2 003 until 18 June 2003, after which she went back into a reserve status. At so me point, the Applicant alleges she signed pa perwork with an officer in her R es erve Unit, which placed her i n the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR ) for her last few months of obligated service . Per the available reco rds, it appears the command only tried to contact her once two weeks prior to recommending her for discharge , with there being only six weeks left on her contract. Eventually, the Command ’ s request to discharge the Applicant , due to unsatisfactory drill participation, was approved on 1 June 2004 , and she was given a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization. Alternatively, there is documentation in the Applicant’s record that the Applicant was honorably discharged on 22 March 2004 and correspondenc e , dated 20 November 2008 from Navy Personnel Command , stating she was discharged honorably and that she wa s recommended for reenlistment. The NDRB d etermined , based on the Applicant’s overall service record and the November 2008 correspondence from Navy Personnel Command, that the Applicant ’s characterization of service shall change to Honorable and that the narrative reason for separation shall change to Secretarial Authority. Relief granted.

With regards to awards, the Applicant may petition the Board for Cor rection of Naval Records (BCNR) at 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 or check their website ( http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr ) for further information .

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 . 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 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 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101656

Original file (ND1101656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19940107 - 19940123Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19940124Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040115Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 06 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 65EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901304

Original file (ND0901304.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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200129

Original file (ND1200129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package, however, the record shows the Applicant was not taken to Special Court-Martial but was administratively separated from the Navy after requesting separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT)on 29 June 2007. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401733

Original file (ND1401733.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Authority for Discharge: (per NPC PERS-4913) MILPERSMAN 1910-158 [UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE] Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301527

Original file (ND1301527.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After taking her sexual assault and deployment into consideration, the Separation Authority determined she warranted separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense) with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500305

Original file (ND1500305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The applicant did not provide any documentation of her travel, travel claim, credit card statements, or emails with the command to substantiate her case. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800132

Original file (ND0800132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, the Board determined that an upgrade to honorable was inappropriate.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101973

Original file (ND1101973.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20050517 - 20060109Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060110Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090413Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 04 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 54EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(3)Behavior:3.3(3)OTA: 3.66Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801716

Original file (ND0801716.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Discharge unjust and unfair Decision Date: 20081120Location: Washington D.C. The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate discharge characterization considering the UCMJ violations involved. ” Additional Reviews :...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301289

Original file (ND1301289.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000382

Similar Decisions