Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00522
Original file (ND04-00522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EM3, USN
Docket No. ND04-00522

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040212. 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 20040922. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety was found, however, an 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 change. The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “A LETTER IS INCLUDED LISTING MY ISSUES

I also included a copy of my advancement exam result to both show I made EM2 as well as to show my Evaluations of my conduct in the military were always very high.

To the Navy Discharge Review Board,

I, A_ C_ (Applicant), respectfully request to upgrade my discharge status from General (under honorable conditions) to Honorable. I do so for the reasons that, when discharged, I was misinformed by both Personnelmen and Legalman, aboard the U.S.S. Dwight D. Eisenhower, that my discharge status would allow me to receive both my Montgomery GI bill, which I had paid for in full, as well as my navy college fund of $40,000 for which I had waived a bonus $10,000. Once I attempted to receive my college benefits I was informed that my discharge status denied me the ability to receive aforementioned funds. This misinformation on my part put both my education and financial situation back several steps, taking a full year before I was able to begin college full-time. Had I understood the circumstances a general discharge would give me, I would have reconsidered my strategy as well as been prepared for my civilian life.

My reasons for working for a discharge was for anxiety disorder, due to depression, stress and suicidal thoughts and mimicry, which apparently is fully acceptable for a member of the Naval Nuclear Power Field. Both Naval psychiatrists who examined my behavior and habits gave me a “fit for full duty” status. My reasons for not appearing mentally unstable is that I used most of my effort to maintain sanity and the appearance thereof, which meant that I no longer had energy to work on my job and qualifications, making my workload, stress and anxiety that much worse. I know that had I stayed in the field I was in, I would have eventually had a breakdown of some form, perhaps involving violence or self-mutilation. I have included evidence of my stress, anger and hopeless feelings in a letter I have enclosed that I wrote to a friend while I was undergoing qualification.

Please judge this case with fairness and understanding. Thank you.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD form 214
Report of Psychological Evaluation, Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, VA dated 23 Jul 2002 (2 pages)
Examination Profile Information, Naval Education and Training Professional Development and Technology Center, dated Sep 2002
Letter from Applicant, dated 29 Jan 2004
Excerpted letter from Applicant, undated
Developmental History of A_ C_ (Applicant), dated 28 Jul 2004 (2 pages)
Letter from C- E_, LCWS, Health Center, Indiana University, dated 28 Jul 2004
Intake Report for A_ C_ (Applicant), dated 2 Jun 2004 (2 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     980727 - 980816  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980817               Date of Discharge: 020930

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 01 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 93

 Highest Rate: EM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (4)    Behavior: 3.00 (4)                OTA: 2.97

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM, NDSM, AFEM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

020723:  Medical Evaluation: The service member manifests a severe inability to adjust to the demands of Navy life. The evaluating psychologist believes that this is not a short-term condition which can be treated in a reasonable period of time. Per DoD Instruction 1332.28, this condition does not constitute a physical disability and its chronicity has exceeded two years, permitting separation under the above reference.
020911:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a least favorable characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to physical or mental conditions not necessarily amounting to disability but affecting potential for continued active duty in the naval service as evidenced by diagnosis of chronic adjustment disorder, with anxiety.
020911:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

020919:  Commanding Officer directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a personality disorder.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020930 with a general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a 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 but not equitable (B and C).

Issue 1: The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should have been the “type warranted by service record.” A review of Applicant’s records indicated an honorable discharge was warranted. Applicant’s performance and behavior marks were above the standard required for an honorable discharge and there was no adverse information that would have warranted any other characterization of his service. Therefore, relief to the character of service is granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200), SEPARATION BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONS.

B. 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.

C. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00729

    Original file (ND02-00729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00729 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 920430, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The characterization for separation is General (Under Honorable Conditions).] Though the record is incomplete, normally there will be something to indicate less than acceptable performance, but such is not the case here.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01424

    Original file (ND03-01424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01424 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030903. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Medical problems impaired my ability to serve, as indicated on DD form 214 as the reason for separation.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01156

    Original file (ND99-01156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.980209: Mental Health Dept, Naval Ambulatory Care Center, Groton, CT: CHIEF COMPLAINT: Pt reported to his command in January 198 that he was having suicidal thoughts and he was transferred TAD to Group 2 for further assessment. Recommendation made at that time that he continue aboard the USS OKLAHOMA CITY and further recommended that pt seek further mental health eval should his anxiety continue after the boat transferred to Norfolk. Additionally,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01252

    Original file (ND03-01252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01252 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030721. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Furthermore, my reenlistment code should be changed to RE-I since I was not allowed to stay on active duty and was denied due process.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00762

    Original file (ND02-00762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SR arrived at RTC on March 15, 1999 and was referred because SR stated that he was depressed and appeared unmotivated. SR is suitable to report to Separations Division.990401: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service possible as General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to physical or mental conditions as evidenced by a depressive disorder under MILPERMSAN...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00491

    Original file (ND04-00491.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00491 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040204. After repeated requests to my superiors, and visits with the Chaplain, I was referred for psychological evaluation. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00023

    Original file (ND04-00023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation/uncharacterized. I am making this request because at the time of my entry (Aug. 99)1 was young and stupid. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01217

    Original file (ND99-01217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: “CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY” vice “OTHER DESIGNATED PHYSICAL CONDITION”. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 971211 with an uncharacterized service for convenience of the Government due to condition, not a disability (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600238

    Original file (ND0600238.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge bechanged to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “ Medical discharge. However since he made a very serious suicide attempt, it may not be the best interest for him and Navy to continue in the Navy.990922: Medical entry: Recruit Evaluation Unit, Branch Clinic 1017, Naval Hospital, Great Lakes, IL, J_ E_ D_, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist/Staff: SR comes to REU as a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00013

    Original file (ND02-00013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00013 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010926, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Again, not the rank of someone who receives a General Discharge. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of discharge shall change to Honorable.After a complete review of the applicant’s service records and supplemental documentation provided, the NDRB determined that the applicant’s service in his last...