Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01211
Original file (ND03-01211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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. T he 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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00784

    Original file (ND00-00784.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The representative did not respond to the Board's inquiry concerning applicant's application and did not submit additional issues for the Board to address. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981231 with an uncharacterized service (entry level separation) by reason of physical disability, with severance pay (A). In response to the applicant’s issue 1, the applicant was properly discharged for a disability, with severance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00091

    Original file (ND01-00091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 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).The applicant’s first issue states: “My discharge was a honorable conditions general discharge and I was told when I was discharged that I would be able...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00573

    Original file (ND99-00573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 13 pages of Medical Board documentation (including separation physical exam) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900316 - 900321 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900322 Date of Discharge: 970822 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00357

    Original file (ND03-00357.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:Copy of DD Form 214 Character Reference letter, undtd, from C_ P_ (former employer) 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01079

    Original file (ND00-01079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991124 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) due to physical disability (A). 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).In response to the applicant’s issues, the Board found that the applicant received an entry level separation because he had...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00224

    Original file (ND03-00224.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00224 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 921224: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge by reason of physical disability existing prior to entry on active duty established by physical evaluation board proceedings. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19930119 under honorable conditions...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01390

    Original file (ND03-01390.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical Board recommended the case be referred to the Central Physical Evaluation Board and the Applicant be discharged from active military service. 960426: Applicant accepted finding of the Medical Board.960718: President, Physical Evaluation Board found Applicant unfit to perform duties because of a physical condition, which existed prior to entry and requested the Chief of Naval Personnel effect the discharge. As there are no marks found in the Applicant’s service record, the evidence...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00651

    Original file (ND01-00651.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally the service record did not contain the DISCHARGE PROCESSING PACKAGE and applicant did not provide. 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. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01109

    Original file (ND01-01109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01109 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010821, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing opportunities to further one’s education or to allow an individual the opportunity to receive veteran’s benefits, as requested in the issue. In the applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00401

    Original file (ND00-00401.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00401 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000211, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s military record and found that due to the applicant’s NJP and overall enlisted performance evaluation averages, a general (under honorable conditions) discharge is warranted. Relief will not be granted concerning this issue.The applicant’s representative submitted the...