Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00611
Original file (ND04-00611.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00611

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040304. The Applicant requests the characterization of service, and the narrative reason, received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge 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 20041022. 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)/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. I was discharged due to medical and physical conditions. I believe that general should be upgraded to honorable due to the circumstances.

2. I also paid the 12 month at $100 per month to qualify and be entitled to use the G.I. Bill.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copies of DD Form 214 (2)
Copy of Disability Entitlement Letter from Department of Veterans Affairs, dated April 5, 2003
 Copy of Disability Claim Decision Letter from Department of Veteran Affairs (3 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     000929 - 010828  COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 010829               Date of Discharge: 020725

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 00 11 06
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 84
Highest Rate: FN
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.50 (2)    Behavior: 3.00 (2)                OTA: 2.90
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM
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 :

020301:  Disenrolled from the Nuclear Power Training program for academic failure.
020624:  Psychiatric Evaluation: Applicant diagnosed with a non-Medically Boardable diagnosis of Depressive Disorder, NOS, Moderate. He was placed on a mood stabilizing medication (i.e. Celexa), recommended for Expeditious Administrative Separation IAW NAVMILPERSMAN 1910-120, and transferred to TPU, Naval Station until discharged from the Navy.
020628:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to a 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 depressive disorder not otherwise specified.
020628:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
020629:  Commanding Officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a physical or mental condition not necessarily amounting to disability but affecting potential for continued active duty in the naval service as evidenced by diagnosis of depressive disorder not otherwise specified. Commanding Officer’s comments: FR D_, reported on board USS CONSTELLATION on 020613. On 020614, he reported to CONSTELLATION’s Emergency Room after taking 8 Somninex tablets and having suicidal ideation. He was later transported to Naval Medical Center San Diego, where he stated he was academically dropped from Nuclear Power school. Moreover, he was removed from Submarine school for psychiatric reasons but considered suitable for surface duty. FR D_, received inpatient care from 020615 to 020621 and was diagnosed by a clinical psychologist with depressive disorder not otherwise specified. Although he has currently denied the presence of suicidal or homicidal intent, he is judged to represent a significant risk to himself if retained on active duty. FR D_ falls within the parameters of reference (a), and an administrative discharge is ordered under these circumstances. Therefore, I order FR D_s’ discharge from active duty. Characterization of service is General.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020725 with a general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability (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. The documentation and statements provided by the Applicant did not refute the presumption of regularity in this case. The Applicant was diagnosed with a non-medically boardable diagnosis of Depressive Disorder on 20020624. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. Relief not warranted.

Issue 2: Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose to further educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. 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 naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 33, effective
28 Aug 01 until 21 Aug 2002, 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 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 | 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00952

    Original file (ND04-00952.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “I was discharged for medical reasons & should have received an Honorable 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...

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00791

    Original file (ND03-00791.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 (C and D).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01400

    Original file (ND03-01400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    P: Referred to PMNH for further evaluation.020117: Addiction Rehabilitation Department: A/P: Applicant in treatment at ARD for EOTH, now with suicide ideation per evaluation by staff psychologist. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20020809 with a general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability (A). However, the NDRB is authorized to consider...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00972

    Original file (ND03-00972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during her less than one month in the military to warrant a change of discharge to "honorable." 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...

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00002

    Original file (ND03-00002.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00002 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020926, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00474

    Original file (ND03-00474.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to medical. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C. The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00522

    Original file (ND04-00522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “A LETTER IS INCLUDED LISTING MY ISSUES 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.