Author: CAP
Last saved by: shirley.robertson
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND03-01211

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

ex-AC2, USN
Docket No. ND03-01211

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030709.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040624.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620270.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I was discharged from active duty after being diagnosed by a Navy Doctor (O-6) with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  I received disability severance pay based on that diagnosis at a rate of 10%

During my separation proceedings, I was informed by the Base Admin Department, that I would not be able to re-enlist but would be able to use my Montgomery G.I. Bill.  Based on that information, I decided not to contest the characterization of my discharge.

Recently, I attempted to enroll at my local community college.  During this process, I was informed that a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions did not qualify me to utilize my Montgomery G.I. Bill.

During my Military Service, I received positive evaluations and two Good Conduct Medals.  There is nothing negative in my record prior to my being affected with PTSD.

I need to attend college in order to obtain decent employment.  I feel that my service was honorable and merits the Boards changing the characterization of my discharge to “Honorable” in order to permit me to use the benefits I earned to enable me to attend college.”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214
Letter from Applicant
Cover letter for supporting documents
31 pages from Applicant’s service record
18 pages from Applicant’s medical record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	880907 - 890327	COG
	Active:   USN			890328 - 921203	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  921204		Date of Discharge:  970516

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  05  13
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  26			Years Contracted:  4 (17 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  58

Highest Rate:  AC2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.4 (5)	Behavior:  3.6 (5)		OTA:  3.4

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, OSR(2), GCM(2)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620270.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970115:	Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, VA diagnosed the Applicant with posttraumatic stress disorder, acute, moderate, DNEPTE, DSM-IV 309.81. Recommended referral to the Central Physical Evaluation Board.

970423: 	President, PEB found that Applicant was unfit for duty due to a physical disability and requested administrative separation with 10% severance pay.

970428:	BUPERS directed Applicant’s separation by reason of disability with severance pay.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970516 under honorable conditions (general) for disability with severance pay (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of an enlisted performance evaluation with a final individual trait average of below 1.99 during the enlistment under review.  The Applicant’s performance did not meet the requirements for an honorable characterization of service.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for her conduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions.  An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration 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.  However, the Applicant may be eligible for some VA benefits based upon her previous honorable enlistment.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country during the enlistment under review.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documents that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the discharge sufficient to warrant an upgrade.  

The Applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 
11 Dec 1997, Article 3620270, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF DISABILITY.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

If you believe that 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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at "afls14.jag.af.mil".

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX: