Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001094

Original file (ND1001094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-IS2, USN-R

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100324

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge: (corrected) UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE
Authority for Discharge: (corrected) MILPERSMAN 1910-158 [UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE]

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         NONE              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020625     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060417      Highest Rank/Rate: IS2
Length of Service:
         Inactive:        Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
         Active   Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 22 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: NFIR

Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations: ONRI Award

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.        Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.
2.       Applicant seeks an upgrade to improve employment opportunities.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 05 13             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 did not identify any decisional issues for the Board ’s consideration . Th e Board did note the Applicant’s service records were incomplete (lack of performance evaluations, active duty for training record, inactive duty training record, satisfactory participation requirements record/NAVPERS 1570-2, and administrative separation documentation to include separation authority decision memoranda ). Moreover, the documents within the record contained several inconsistencies and improper annotations. However, the Board did co nduct a thorough review of the available evidence and the circumstances that led to discharge to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warnings, commanding officer nonjudicial punishments (NJP), or trial by courts-martial. The record did contain a
7 Apr 2006 Page 13 entry from his local command that stated the Applicant was separated with an Honorable discharge but not recommended for reenlistment (page 1), and the Ap plicant was discharged with an Honorable discharge due to End of Obligated Active Service (EAOS), MILPERSMAN 1910-104, and was recommended for reenlistment (page 2) . Ten days later, on 17 Apr 2006, another Page 13 entry was made stating that the Applicant was separated with an Other Than Honorable discharge due to Miscellaneous/General Reasons, MILPERSMAN 1070-158 (which should have read “1910-158, Unsatisfactory Performance in the Ready Reserve”). The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant exercised or waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative separation board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review . The Applicant was discharged from the Navy Reserve on 17 Apr 2006 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge for “Miscellaneous/General Reasons , ” which is a nonexistent narrative reason per the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN).

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

: (Nondecisional) The A pplicant seeks an upgrade to improve employment 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.

After extensive review and analysis of the available records, the NDRB determined that the 7 Apr 2006 NAVPERS 1070/Page 13 Honorable discharge entry was the most correct characterization of service. The Applicant’s service records do not contain any retention warnings or documented misconduct. Therefore, in accordance with the orders and directives in effect at the time of his separation, the Board determined r elief was warranted both on the basis of propriety and equity.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice and r ecord e ntries, the Board found the discharge was not equitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall . Moreover, the combination of a lack of MILPERSMAN required documentary evidence , gross inconsistencies within the available record s , and the fact that an unfavorable characterization of service (UOTHC) was awarded 10 days after the Honorable character of service was awarded (on 7 Apr 2006 ) led the Board to conclude that the current narrative reason for separation was likely incorrect. Accordingly, the Board determined that the narrative reason for separation shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800014

Original file (ND0800014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100412

Original file (ND1100412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001054

Original file (ND1001054.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant contends his discharge from the U.S. Navy Reserve was improper/inequitable. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902427

Original file (ND0902427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on his overall record of performance and the requirements in section 1910-152 of the MILPERSMAN, the Board determined the Applicant’s characterization of service should be upgraded to Honorable. Since written direction from the command and appropriate counseling via specific documentation is required to enroll a service member in alcohol rehabilitation treatment, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of government affairs as the Applicant failed to provide any evidence to the...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901121

Original file (ND0901121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants to reenlist and was told he would beeligible for reenlistment into the Navy six months after discharge.2. However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Summary: After a thorough review of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101305

Original file (ND1101305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

: (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military. 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 for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601009

Original file (ND0601009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

NAVAL FORCE, EUROPE 20050831 Narrative reason directed:Characterization of directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20051007 Additional Information Considered by Board Type of documentation submitted by the Applicant and considered by the Board Document Type #Pages Related to Period of Service:Service/Medical Record:297Other Period of Service: 0Related to Post-Service Period: Community Service:0Education: 0 Employment: 0Health/Medical:0 Character Statements: 0 Criminal Records...
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 | ND0900818

Original file (ND0900818.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient enough to warrant an upgrade of his discharge characterization. The Board determined the characterization of service received, General (Under Honorable Conditions), was an appropriate characterization and with limited post-service documentation an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101673

Original file (ND1101673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was improper. ” 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001094

Similar Decisions