Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101459

Original file (ND1101459.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110524

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge: HOMOSEXUAL ADMISSION
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20070305 - 20070326     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070327     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20071001      Highest Rank/Rate: SA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 5 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 69
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NOB ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, PISTOL MARKSMANSHIP RIBBON ”
         “ UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION) ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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 :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        Applicant seeks discharge and RE code upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.
2.       Applicant seeks discharge upgrade due to repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 09 29             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall HOMOSEXUAL ADMISSION .

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 . T he Board complete d a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warnings, commanding officer nonjudicial punishment , or trial by courts-martial. The record did reflect an award for Military Excellence received by the Applicant at recruit training (and subsequent promotion to E-2) for his excellent performance. The record also revealed that the Applicant submitted a signed letter to his Commanding Officer (CO) at Naval Submarine School Groton, CT stating that he was homosexual and understood the ramifications of such a statement based on current Navy (DoD) policy. Based on the statement made by the Applicant to his chain of command and his commanding officer’s belief that the Applicant’s statement was credible, the Applicant’s command administratively processed him for separation, which wa s mandatory per the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN). When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 2 Aug 2007 , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, request an administrative separation board, and present evidence demonstrating that he did not engage in, attempt to engage in, have a propensity to engage in, or intend to engage in , homosexual acts. On 14 Aug 2007, the Applicant’s C O submitted a request for administrative separation of the Applicant from the Navy with the recommendation for an Uncharacterized (Entry Level Separation ) discharge. On 30 Aug 200 7 , the Commander, Navy Personnel Command directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy due to Homosexual Admission. The discharge was effected on 1 Oct 2007 .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a discharge and RE code 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade due to the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. By regulation, an Uncharacterized description shall be used when separation is initiated while a member is within the first 180 days of continuous active duty (described as an entry level separation) except when the characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (OTH) is more appropriate or Honorable is clearly warranted. The Applicant had no misconduct that would rate an OTH discharge, and there was no evidence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of military duty that would clearly warrant the characterization of servic e as H onorable . Therefore, an Uncharacterized discharge is considered the most appropriate characterization of service. R elief 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 the administrative separation p rocess, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain HOMOSEXUAL ADMISSION . 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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 29 April 2005 until
15 June 2008, Article 1910-148, SEPARATION BY REASON OF HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT.

B. Public Law 111-321, signed 22 Dec 2010 (implemented 20 Sep 2011).

C. Under Secretary of Defense (P ersonnel & Readiness ) Memorandum (Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell), 20 Sep 2011.

D . 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 | ND1500040

Original file (ND1500040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301056

Original file (ND1301056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Conduct was the only basis for discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201118

Original file (ND1201118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301306

Original file (MD1301306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Subsequently, an administrative board voted 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported the Applicant’s Homosexual Admission and recommended she be separated with an Uncharacterized characterization. Given the lack of any misconduct or derogatory counseling entries in the Applicant’s service record and her being notified solely for separation due to homosexual admission, the NDRB determined that the relief, as requested, is warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200295

Original file (ND1200295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Narrative Reason for Discharge: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. However, pursuant to Public Law 111-321, and in accordance with the guidance set forth in the Under Secretary of Defense (P&R)...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400941

Original file (ND1400941.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends her narrative reason and associated separations code for discharge should be changed from “Homosexual Conduct” to “Secretarial Authority” due to the repeal of the “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy.2. In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200410

Original file (MD1200410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of, the Reentry Code shall change to RE-1A.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 NDRB 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. This...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300439

Original file (ND1300439.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Narrative Reason for Separation: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. The Applicant’s service record documents no misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101975

Original file (ND1101975.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

: (Decisional) (Board Issue) (Propriety) During the Board’s review of the Applicant’s record of service and discharge process, the NDRB determined that the Applicant warrants a change to the narrative reason for separation but not to the corresponding reentry code in accordance with repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Narrative Reason for Separation review: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301296

Original file (MD1301296.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s separation code of HRB1, reenlistment code, and narrative reason of Homosexual Admission were proper at the time of discharge. The NDRB presumed that the Applicant’s separation by reason of Homosexual Admission in accordance with paragraph 6207 of the MARCORSEPMAN was proper and equitable at the time it was issued.In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101459

Similar Decisions