Docket No: 5790-19  
Ref: Signature Date  
From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records  
To:   Secretary of the Navy  


Ref:   (a) 10 U.S.C. §1552 
       (b) USECDEF Memo of 25 Jul 2018 “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity,            Injustice, or Clemency Determinations” 

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former petty officer of the Navy Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with a request to upgrade his discharge.  

2.  The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 11 June 2020, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of his naval service records, and applicable statutes, regulations, policies. 

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as follows: 

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. 

b. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits. 

c. The Petitioner initially enlisted in the Navy Reserve Sea & Air Mariner Program on 6 June 1994.  Following completion of initial recruit training, Petitioner was assigned to NMCB-at Navy/Marine Corps Reserve Center, .  On 9 June 1996, the Petitioner was selected for advancement to third class petty officer. 

d. Petitioner’s anniversary year for retirement eligibility computations commenced each February 28.  On 26 February 2000, Petitioner routed a chit through his chain of command to transfer to theIndividual Ready Reserve (IRR).  Petitioner’s command approved the request chit the same day.  A “Page 13” entry was placed in Petitioner’s record on 26 February 2000 documenting his transfer to the IRR.  The Page 13 specifically noted the reason for termination was “fulfillment of obligated service.”  On 1 June 2000, Petitioner was discharged from the Navy Reserve. However, he received a general (under honorable conditions) (GEN) characterization of service due to unsatisfactory participation in the reserve and was assigned an “RE-4” reentry code. 

e. The Board noted that on the Petitioner’s Statement of Service for Navy Reserve Retirement (Statement of Service), in five out of his six years of service, he received satisfactory years towards retirement. Petitioner’s Statement of Service did not otherwise indicate that he was an unsatisfactory participant in the Navy Reserve.  

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants relief, given the totality of the circumstances. Additionally, the Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in reference (b).  Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by this policy. 

The purpose and intent of the Under Secretary of Defense Memorandum (reference (b)), is to simplify the process for veterans seeking redress and assist Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records “in determining whether relief is warranted on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency.” The memorandum noted that “increasing attention is being paid to…the circumstances under which citizens should be considered for second chances and the restoration of rights forfeited,” and that “BCM/NRs have the authority to upgrade discharges or correct military records to ensure fundamental fairness.” The memorandum sets clear standards and principles to guide BCM/NRs in application of their equitable relief authority, and further explains that boards shall consider a number of factors to determine whether to grant relief, including arrests, criminal charges, or any convictions. 

In keeping with the letter and spirit of the recent policy guidance, the Board concluded that the Petitioner’s claim has merit and that corrective action should be taken as outlined below. The Board determined that separating Petitioner with a GEN discharge following his IRR approval was unjust given that there was no misconduct or adverse Page 13 warnings noted in Petitioner’s record. 

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. 

RECOMMENDATION: 
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show: 

That upon Petitioner’s transfer to the IRR, his characterization of service be changed to “Honorable,” the separation authority be changed to “MILPERSMAN 1910-164,” the separation code be changed to “JFF,” the narrative reason for separation should be changed to “Secretarial Authority,” and the reentry code be changed to “RE-1J.” 

That the “Page 13” Administrative Remarks NAVPERS 1070/613 entry dated 1 June 2000 be removed from Petitioner’s record. 

That Petitioner be issued a new NAVPERS 1070/615 Record of Discharge from the US Navy Reserves (or its current equivalent). 

That Petitioner be issued a new Honorable Discharge certificate. 

That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 

That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 7 June 2019. 


4.  It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter. 

5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 



3