ex-HM3, USNR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20141104
Characterization of Service Received:  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT 
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 1910-140 [PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT]

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	NONE		Active:	USNR 19971024-20050318 HON
				USNR 20050319-20091212 HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Current Enlistment:  20091213	Age at Enlistment:  42
Period of Enlistment:  4 Years  NO Extension
Date of Discharge:  20130113	Highest Rank/Rate:  HM3
Length of Service:  04 Year(s)   00  Month(s)   00 Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  32
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  NFIR	Behavior:  NFIR	OTA:  NFIR

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	NRMSM NDSM FLOC

Periods of UA/CONF:  NONE

NJP:  NONE

SCM:  NONE

SPCM:  NONE

CIVIL ARREST:  NONE

CC:  NONE

Retention Warning Counseling:  2

- 20090428:	For failure to meet body composition standards on 20090418.

- 19980710:	For failure to complete Damage Control, Shipboard Firefighting and Swim Qualification training.

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:		Other Documentation:	
		Additional Statements:
	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	The Applicant contends that she was unfairly separated based on late travel card payments which occurred when she was out of state dealing with her father’s illness and death and was unable to receive mail.

Decision

Date:  20150402	      DOCUMENTARY REVIEW	Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  NONE

By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS).
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.
By a vote of 5-0 the Reenlistment Code shall remain RE-4.

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 completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to her discharge and the discharge process to ensure her discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service did not include any nonjudicial punishment, court martials, or counseling.  The command administratively processed her for separation in absentia when she became overdue for a government travel card bill and could not be contacted.  The command mailed her the administrative separation package via certified mail, and it was returned undeliverable.  

Issue 1:  (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity)  RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends that she was unfairly separated based on late travel card payments which occurred when she was out of state dealing with her father’s illness and death and was unable to receive mail.  The Applicant provided a copy of a funeral notice for her father for a ceremony scheduled for 27 July 2013 and a statement explaining that she was unable to receive mail due to being out of state and that she could not meet the Commanding Officer’s deadline.  The applicant did not provide any documentation of her travel, travel claim, credit card statements, or emails with the command to substantiate her case.  Per documentation provided by the Applicant’s command, the Applicant was mailed a 60 day delinquency notice for $972 of overdue charges to her government travel card on17 October 2012 via certified letter # 7012-2210-8000-0411-0586.  The letter was returned to the command as undeliverable.  On 13 December 2012, she was provided an administrative separation notice and a 90 day delinquency notice for her government travel card via certified letter #7012-2210-0000-0411-0081which was also returned as undeliverable.  The Commanding Officer of 4th DENCO4th DNBN spoke with the Applicant on 12 January 2013 and set a deadline of 1600 CDT on Monday, 14 January 2013 to establish a payment plan with the travel card company.  He followed up the phone conversation with an email that same day.  Per the Applicant’s statement, when she called the travel card company, they said it was too late to set up a payment plan and they required payment in full.  According to the Applicant, she paid off the entire balance several days after the 14 January deadline.  Although the Applicant was dealing with a difficult family situation, there is no indication that she remained in contact with her reserve unit and provided updated contact information.  The Applicant signed a Statement of Understanding for the government travel charge card program on 11 February 2012 where she acknowledged that “You are further ordered to promptly (within 30 days of receipt) pay each and every GTCC invoice in full.  Your failure to comply with this order is dishonorable failure to pay your just debts, and is both contrary to good order and discipline and service discrediting, and may result in disciplinary action and/or your administrative separation.”   From the Applicant’s statement, she was aware that there was an unresolved bill, and she did not properly follow up on the matter nor communicate with her command while she was out of state.  A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.  Relief Denied.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain  MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.  The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of her 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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:  Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code.  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