Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901584

Original file (ND0901584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090518

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20030228 - 20031028     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20031029     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070228      Highest Rank/Rate: MM3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 20 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 80
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 1.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 1.94

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Pe riods of UA /C ONF :

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

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 /To Representat ion :          From /To Congress m ember :
Oth er Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 25 May 2005 until 27 July 2008, 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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant believes his discharge from the Navy was inequitable.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0218 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

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 discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to the Applicant's discharge and the discharge process to ensure pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met. The Applicant's record of service included a psychological evaluation which diagnosed him with a sleepwalking disorder, which deemed him unsuitable for continued military service. Although the Applicant was additionally diagnosed with a nightmare disorder and an adjustment disorder with anxiety (mild), the sleepwalking disorder was the primary factor in his separation from the Navy. The NDRB also noticed the Applicant had administrative remarks stating he was considered by a medical officer to be drug/alcohol dependent and was afforded the opportunity to receive a minimum of 30 days in-patient treatment at a Level III treatment facility; which the Applicant declined. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority. The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative board.
Issue 1: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant believes his discharge from the Navy was inequitable. The NDRB reviewed the Applicant's service record for completeness and to gain insight into the commands reasoning for the discharge characterization issued. Even though the Applicant's record of service contained no documentation of misconduct, it did contain evaluations reporting sub-standard performance. In the last two evaluations, covering a period from August 2005 to February 2007 (18 months), the Applicant's performance and conduct had significantly declined, to include him signing an adverse performance evaluation report. The command summarized his performance by making statements, such as: poor motivation and level-of-knowledge, significantly delinquent in qualifications, requires constant supervision due to no self-motivation, self-serving attitude, total disregard for any authoritative figure, irresponsible - can not be counted on to complete even the most menial of tasks without constant supervision, never considers others – always places self first even if detrimental to others. The NDRB realizes that the Applicant was in a car accident (5 months prior to discharge) and suffered ill effects from it, but opined that it was only partially to blame for his decline. The NDRB determined the commands decision to discharge the Applicant with a General discharge was warranted based on his overall characterization while in the Navy. Relief denied.
Drawn Shape (ignored-not implemented yet) Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant's summary of service, service record entries and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews and Post-Service 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, 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 veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American 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 their 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 discharge 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 naval 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 certificates (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 at 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

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601119

Original file (ND0601119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20010606Reason for Discharge due to: PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONSLeast Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20010606Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): (20010606)Separation Authority (date):COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL HOSPITAL CORPS SCHOOL (20010606)Narrative...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700163

Original file (ND0700163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board found that Discussion Issue1: either an Issue 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 Board determined that the lack of documentation provided by the Applicant did not provide justification to upgrade the characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) to Honorable.Issue 3: ().The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300408

Original file (MD1300408.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In August 2011, competent medical authority diagnosed the Applicant with sleepwalking disorder, and his command administratively processed him for separation due to Condition, Not a Disability. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101062

Original file (ND1101062.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/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900996

Original file (MD0900996.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

This documentation contradicts his statement provided in the DD 293 that he never had a problem with sleep walking before enlisting and while at boot camp, andit supports the fraudulent enlistment determination.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 the discharge was proper and equitable. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800503

Original file (ND0800503.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore the Board found his uncharacterized characterization appropriate.The Applicant should be aware that, with respect to non-service-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, educational pursuits, and especially civilian employment, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700080

Original file (ND0700080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Recommendations: Administrative separation for the sleepwalking condition. ]19990916: Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital Corps School informed Commander NavyPersonnel Command of the Applicant’s discharge by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure and convenience of the government –physical or mental conditions with a service characterization of entry level separation. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge Least Favorable...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801848

Original file (MD0801848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant claims he should have received a medical discharge for an attempted suicide vice for a pattern of misconduct because he was suffering fromPTSD due to injuries received from an Improvised Explosive Device(IED) blast in Iraq.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 Board determined the awarded discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801509

Original file (ND0801509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the Applicant’s narrative reason for separation was accurately given as “personality disorder.” The Applicant provides no documented evidence which disputes this medical determination and the Board determined a change to the narrative reason would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901816

Original file (ND0901816.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants narrative reason changed to secretarial authority. Since the Applicant failed to provide any documentary evidence to support his request and the BCNR has already changed the narrative reason for separationto personality disorder, the NDRB determined a change in narrative reason is not warranted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901584

Similar Decisions