Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900534
Original file (ND0900534.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM1, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090107
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to: MEDICAL / DISABILITY

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19991022 - 20000717     Active:            20000718 - 20030128

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20030129     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20051230      Highest Rank/Rate: MM1
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 02 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 91
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.75 ( 4 )       OTA: 4.07

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : S CM : SPCM: C C : Retention Warning Counseling :


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ JFX ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:     
DD 214:         Service/ Medical Record:                  Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:                References:              
Additional Statements :
 From Applicant:      From Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :
Oth er Documentation :


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Seeks a change in Narrative Reason for Separation.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0827             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY .
Discussion
The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . The Applicant’s record of service contained no documentation of sub-standard performance or misconduct. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned an impropriety in the narrative reason for separation. At the time of discharge, the applicant received an Honorable discharge with a narrative reason for separa tion listed as Personality Disorder , even though she specifically was not diagnosed wit h a personality disorder .

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends her narrative reason for separation is inaccurate and should be changed. The Board carefully reviewed all documentation and noted that the attending psychologist stated that the Applicant had a clinical (mental) disorder, which was noted as obsessive/compulsive disorder and was documented under Axis I in a five-part diagnostic impression system. If the Applicant had a personality disorder, this diagnosis would have been properly documented under Axis II labeled “Personality Disorders and Mental Retardation.” On the psychologist’s final assessment, he determined that Axis I to be “Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder” and Axis II to be “No Diagnosis.” An Axis I diagnosis, with no diagnosis in Axis II, normally results in a narrative reason for separation to be either a “Condition not a Disability” or “Physical/Mental Condition.” The Board found, by a vote of 3 to 2, that the evidence of record does not support the Applicant’s narrative reason for separation as “Personality Disorder.” Therefore, the Applicant’s narrative reason for separation was determined to be an improper. Relief granted.
Summary: After a thorough review of the available eviden ce, to include the Applicant’s summary of s ervice, medical and service record entries, discharge p rocess and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board foun d the discharge was proper and equitable . However, b y a majority vote of 3-2, t he Board determined that the narrative reason for separation received, Personality Disorder, was improper and shall be change d to Secretarial Authority .



Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 20 June 2005 until 28 May 2008, Article 1910-122, Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s).

 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 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 : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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. There are vetera ns organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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 U .S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 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.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable d ischarge is authorized, 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 other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving n aval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate s (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501226

    Original file (MD0501226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or from an attached document/letter to the Board:“Application for correction of military record under the provisions of title 10, U. S. code, section 1552 (5, 6) Application for the review of discharge from the Armed Forces of the Unites States (6):I, R_ E_ K_(Applicant), would like to request that my discharge determination of Other than Honorable be changed to a Medical...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100135

    Original file (MD1100135.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s record of service, medical officer recommendations for administrative separation due to OCD, and future potential for service, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer processed him for administrative separation. Since the Applicant’s condition interfered with his ability to adequately serve in the Marine Corps, the physician emphasized the recommendation for administrative separation of the Applicant.After considering all of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401538

    Original file (ND1401538.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT. ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00529

    Original file (PD2009-00529.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI’s reported minimum weight was 96% of the minimum expected weight based on the minimum normal BMI and remained above 85% of the MLIC desirable weight (133.5 pounds). Other than anorexia nervosa, no other ratable mental conditions were forwarded to the PEB for adjudication by the MEB psychiatry evaluation. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in reference (b), approve the recommendation of the Physical Disability Board of Review Mr....

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700740

    Original file (ND0700740.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): Separation Authority (date): CO, NAVAL HOSPITAL CORPS SCHOOL (20030716) Reason for discharge directed: PERSONALITY DISORDER Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20030725 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017939

    Original file (20130017939.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests the medical diagnosis on his Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings be changed from bipolar disorder to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The applicant contends the medical diagnosis on his PEB Proceedings should be changed from bipolar disorder to PTSD. The applicant has not provided any evidence to substantiate his assertion that the medical diagnosis on his MEB was changed from PTSD to bipolar disorder.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600996

    Original file (MD0600996.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Multiaxial Diagnoses: Axis I: Anxiety Disorder NOS, Occupational Problem Axis II: Avoidant traits Axis III: No diagnosis. Recommendation: Expeditious administrative separation is very strongly recommended for this service member. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01862

    Original file (PD2012 01862.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board also noted that relative contribution to impairment from the CI’s OCD, PTSD, depression, and anxiety disorders diagnosed could not be separated, therefore the Board considered the mental health conditions together in its deliberations. The examiner also noted no suicidal thoughts. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102145

    Original file (MD1102145.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07687-00

    Original file (07687-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Ms. Moidel and Messrs. Carlsen and Morgan, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 18 April 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board notes that Petitioner had an excellent career in the Navy for many years, that his decline in performance may have been related...