Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001217
Original file (ND1001217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DC3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090126
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)        20040917 - 20050403     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050404     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20081029      Highest Rank/Rate: DC3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 63
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.5 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.96 (4)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20060424 :      Article (Failure to obey order, regulation)
         Awarded: (60 days) Suspended:
                  Extracted from CO’s AdSep Recommendation to Commander, Personnel Command (31 Jul 08)

S CM :             SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20080721 :       For being unable to meet the Navy’s policy on dependent care responsibilities.

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, Change 14, effective 29 March 2006 until 3 August 2010, 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        Applicant seeks an upgrade as discharge was based on hardship, not misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 06 03             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 identif ied one decisional issue for the Board ’s consideration . The Board co nducted 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 included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning for inability to meet U.S. Navy dependent care responsibilities (21 Jul 08) and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, specifics NFIR ) . Based on the Applicant being married to an active duty service member and not being able to fully comply with U.S. Navy mandated family care plan requirements, the Applicant’s command recommended to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command that she be separated due to P arenthood or C ustody of M inor C hildren. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 22 Jul 08 and in consideration of her Commanding Officer’s recommendation for an Honorable discharge , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review. On 17 Oct 08, the Commander, Navy Personnel Command directed that the Applicant be discharged under MILP ERSMAN section 1910-124 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Parenthood or Custody of Minor Children. The Applicant was subsequently discharged from the Navy on 29 Oct 08 .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant seeks an upgrade as she contends that her discharge was based on hardship, not misconduct. The NDRB received a memorandum from the Commander, Nav al Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia, dated 26 Oct 10, requesting the NDRB consider an upgrade of the Applicant’s character of service stating that when the Applicant’s administrative separation recommendation was submitted to Commander, Navy Personnel Command , her command neglected to annotate and recommend an Honorable discharge, as they had intended. When Commander, Navy Personnel Command directed the Applicant be discharged (17 Oct 08 msg) , she was assigned a character of service as General (Under Honorable Conditions). After a detailed examination of the Applicant’s service records, the Board found significant evidence that reflected her continued exemplary service to include evaluation report markings, evaluation comments, awarding of Nav al Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia Blue Jacket of the Year (2007), and Commanding Officer comments in her administrative separation package. After careful consideration of the facts and circumstances surrounding her separation and the orders and directives in effect at the time of her discharge, the board determined that relief was warranted.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries and the administrative separation 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 for additional information.



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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501243

    Original file (ND0501243.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore advised that failure to show significant progress towards meeting Navy’s body fat standards, failure to achieve body fat standards during the 12-month aftercare period, or failure to maintain standards thereafter shall result in consideration for separation from the naval service.931108: Administrative remarks from Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, GA to EN2 C_ (Applicant). SNM is able to do PRT without any problems. Additionally, i n the Applicant’s case the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501114

    Original file (ND0501114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Applicant notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is under other than honorable conditions.980902: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.980930: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct for drug abuse.981013: Commanding...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00207

    Original file (ND04-00207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the 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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 971202 Date of Discharge: 000815 Length of Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600348

    Original file (MD0600348.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that clemency in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was warranted. (no petition for review of NMCCA decision received within time limit).950626: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.950626: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with character of service of bad-conduct as a result of a court-martial. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700255

    Original file (ND0700255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and the characterization of his service. 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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative errors...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900425

    Original file (ND0900425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Based on the BCNR decision to remove the NJP and the DFC, which was the basis for separation, from the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB voted unanimously to upgrade the discharge characterization to “Honorable” and change the narrative reason to Secretarial Authority. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600333

    Original file (ND0600333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Requests that reduction and forfeiture be suspended.940218: Commander, Submarine Group TEN denies Applicant’s NJP appeal.940224: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason ofmisconduct due to commission of serious offense-larceny of government property, driving under the influence of alcohol and civil conviction-driving under the influence of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800337

    Original file (ND0800337.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20000921 - 20001022 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20001023Period of enlistment:4 YearsDate of Discharge:20030930Length of Service: Yrs Mths08 DysEducation Level: 12Age at Enlistment:24AFQT: 35Highest Rank/Rate:BM3Evaluation marks:Performance: 3.0 (2) Behavior: 3.0 (2)OTA: 3.17 (2)Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol ,,,,, and Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800979

    Original file (ND0800979.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6B (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 13 December 1999 until Present establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.B. There was no evidence in the Applicant’s record which provided supporting documentation to the claims the command failed to act upon his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801133

    Original file (ND0801133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraph concerning s, regarding.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process, the Board found The Board recommended an upgrade to “ General (Under Honorable Conditions)” discharge characterization. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...