Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700090
Original file (ND0700090.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-MM3, USN
ND07-00090
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20061025   Characterization Received: GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS   
Narrative Reason: CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-122

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to: HONORABLE
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. GI Bill
                          

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .    
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY .
Date: 20 0 70 906       Location: Washington D.C. The Board found that


Discussion

 Issue 1 : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of government affairs . The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence . Specifically with regard to an impropriety or inequity t here is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support her request for an upgrade in the characterization of her service . To the contrary the record documents that the Applicant was properly processed in accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Article 1910-120, SEPARATION BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONS . The record documents the Applicant’s behavior as malingering and the government may presume misconduct as a result of the Applicants diagnosed alcoholism and personality disorder. In the Commanding Officer’s statement to the discharge authority he states that the Applicant was given opportunities to correct her deficiencies and continue in the naval service. Based upon the record, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inequitable based on the standards of the United States Navy. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considers the discharge proper and equitable.



Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USN R (DEP)      20020731 - 20021209     Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20021210      Years Contracted : ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20041124
Length of Service : 01 Yr 11 Mths 15 D ys   Lost Time :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 87          Highest Rank /Rate : MM3
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.3 Behavior: 3.0 OTA: 3.25 (4)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL


Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

20040105:        Applicant reported to NPTU , Charleston, SC.

2004 0503:        Applicant transferred to NAVHOSP, Charleston, SC.

20040607:        Applicant transferred to LIMDU NAVHOSP, Charleston, SC.
20040610:        Applicant awaiting medical board.

 20040615:        Applicant refused treatment following screening by DAPA .

 20040917:        Medical Record: Applicant to Mental Health Clinic for follow - up at the recommendation of her primary care physician for continued assessment of possible psychological relationship to her chronic physical complaints. Applicant states she his hopeful that she will be separated from the Navy based on the findings of her upcoming medical board.
         Diagnosis: P hysical complaints are psychologically based and stem from lack of coping ability with current psychosocial stressors.
          Recommendation: Fit for duty. Treatment of somatic complaints should be oriented towards physical therapy, healthy forms of exercise and weight management, and psychosocial modalities as much as possible. Applicant advis e d to actively engage in counseling with Fleet and Family Support Center to develop healthy coping strategies, improved stress management, and improved assertiveness skills. Administrative separation.

20041007:        Applicant found fit for full duty by Limited Duty Board .

 20041012:        Medical record: Screening for assignment to sea duty.
         Diagnosis: Applicant not qualified for sea duty.
         Recommendation: Administrative separation.

 20041022:        Medic al record: Applicant seen for follow-u p and recommendations regarding treatment, fitness, and suitability.
         Diagnosis: Undiffe rentiated somatization, a lcohol dep endence, p ersonality d isorder,
         Recommendat ion: Administratively separate for the convenience of the government .
20041025:        Retention Warning : Per the medical findings on 20041022, you have been diagnosed with undifferentiated somatization disorder, malingering, alcohol dependence, early partial remission, and personality disorder, which is interfering with your suitability for sea duty, OCONUS or isolated duty stations. On 20041012, you were found not qualified for sea duty during your sea duty screening. Although found fit for full duty by Limited Duty Board on 20041007, you must remain fit for full duty and be world wide deployable.

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   20041110
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20041110
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL HOSPITAL CHARLESTON ( 20041115 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  A condition, not a physical or mental disability, which interferes with performance of duty.
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20041124


Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 23 September 2004 until 24 May 2005, Article 1910-120, SEPARATION BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONS.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .



ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : 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 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the 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 or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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.
Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD . ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 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 may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.

Board Membership: 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:

 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900318

    Original file (ND0900318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends the characterization of service he received upon discharge should be based on his first enlistment and thus he requests a “General (Under Honorable Conditions).” For his first enlistment, the Applicants service was characterized as “Honorable.” The Applicant reenlisted on 5 December 2003 for 4 more years, which was 7 months before his first enlistment would have expired.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700139

    Original file (ND0700139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issue 3 (): The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in his discharge and the characterization of his service. Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20040920 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Commanding Officer Recommendation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601144

    Original file (ND0601144.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation NONE Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20041022Reason for Discharge due to: due to: Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20041022Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Recommendation of Commanding...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700817

    Original file (MD0700817.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Narrative Reason: UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVEAuthority: MARCORSEPMAN 6213 ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01062

    Original file (MD03-01062.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. (SEE ENCLOSED MEPS PHYSICAL) I enlisted in good faith to serve my country proud.I was discharged for a Medical Condition Not for for Entry Level Performance and Conduct, As you know my medical condition was the reason I could not perform Physical Training as required by Military Basic Training Regulations. 020906: Medical Disposition Officer: Applicant qualified for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00793

    Original file (ND01-00793.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00793 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010522, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. During my enlistment and before I suffered many losses in my personal life.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00296

    Original file (ND01-00296.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 Performance Evaluations (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 911210 - 920826 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920827 Date of Discharge: 940812 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 11 16 (Doesn't exclude lost...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00623

    Original file (ND04-00623.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence relating to his discharge at that time.

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700965

    Original file (MD0700965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred bythreeretention warnings, two nonjudicial punishments (NJP), and a Summary Courts-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 90 (Willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), Article 92 (Willfully disobeying a lawful order), Article 107 (False official statement), and Article 134 (Restriction Breaking) and Article 134 (Adultery). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00650

    Original file (ND01-00650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pt will be referred to Legal for admin separation for a Sleepwalking Disorder. 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 inequitable (C and D).The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record, issues, and additional documentation and found the applicant’s service warranted characterization as honorable. The applicant’s record had no adverse information, and the...