Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901665

Original file (ND0901665.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ABE3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090601

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)        19991123 - 19991201     Active: 19920728 – 19940926 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19991202     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20020322      Highest Rank/Rate: ABE3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 21 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 31
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20000706 :       Article (False official statement)
         Article (Larceny)
         Article 132 (Fraud against the government)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    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), Change 33, effective 14 August 2001 until
21 August 2002, 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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        Requesting reenlistment code changed.
2.       Discharge done out of reprisal.
3 .        Had a proper mental health evaluation by Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) .

Decision

Date: 20 10 0506             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 discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included nonjudicial punishment for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 107 ( False official statement) , Article 121 ( Larceny ), and Article 132 ( Fraud against the government ) . Additionally, the record reflects t he Applicant was given a mental health evaluation on 11 M arch 2002 which indicated the following: 1) he was seen by a psychiatrist after reporting feelings of losing control and expressing a need to talk with someone, 2) the evaluation revealed that he was suffering from work related stress, but did not have a major illness , thought or mood disorder, 3 ) he was unwilling to get involved with people unless certain of being liked, 4 ) he was diagnosed as having an adjustment disorder with depressed mood, and avoidant personality , and 5 ) he was recommended for an expeditious administrative discharge due to a longstanding personality disorder rendering him unsuitable for continued military service and determined to be at risk for becom ing a danger to hims elf or others . Based on the recommendation of the mental health provider, the Applicant ’s command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority (GCMA) review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant has requested his reenlistment code be changed from RE -4 to RE -3. 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.

Issues 2 -3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that h is discharge was not proper because “it was done out of reprisal,” after he reported racial discrimination by a chief. The Applicant also contends he had a proper mental health evaluation done by the Department of V eterans A ffairs (VA) and was never given the same evaluation while in the military. T he Applicant submitted cop ies of his mental health records of May 2008 from the VA which indicat e the following: 1) he was referred for psychiatric testing to confirm or rule out a diagnosis of avoidant personality disorder as listed on his DD Form 214, 2) he did not think he would not be considered for a management position and was not eligible to return to the Reserves based on his narrative reason as indicated in the DD Form 214, 3) he appeared to have a healthy personality style , possessed positive self-worth and coping strategies , 4) his previous diagnosis of avoidant personality disorder may have been more reflective of the current situation and personality style, 5) it was determined that he was not in need of therapeutic intervention since no predominant difficulties or problems were apparent or openly revealed. After reviewing the evidence of record and documentation presented by the Applicant the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to support the Applicant’s contention that his discharge was a result of reprisal. To the contrary, the evidence of record as previously discussed indicates that the Applicant was referred to a mental health provider after expressin g feelings of loss of control and increased stress related to his job. Additionally, the Board reviewed the progress notes from the Miami Veterans Administration Medical Center of 22 April 2008, that were written almost six years after the Applicant’s discharge from the Navy and determined that this evidence does not negate the psychiatric examinations that were conducted at the time of the Applicant’s discharge. The Applicant was diagnosed with a "Personality Disorder” by competent medical authority and was recommended for expeditious administrative separation from the Navy. Thus, the Board finds that the Reason for Discharge reflects the Applicant's mental health status at the time of his discharge, and was proper and equitable at the time of issuance. "Personality Disorder" is an accurate narrative description of the reason for the Applicant's discharge. The contention that the personality disorder no longer exists or has been overcome does not provide a legitimate basis to revise official records that were accurate at the time of issuance.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, 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.

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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201677

Original file (ND1201677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because of mistreatment by superiors.2. Relief 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 and the narrative reason for separation shall...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400325

Original file (ND1400325.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101373

Original file (ND1101373.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300064

Original file (ND1300064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902556

Original file (ND0902556.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19990522 - 19991227Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19991228Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040507Highest Rank/Rate: ABE3Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)10 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 42EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(3)Behavior:3.0(3)OTA: 3.00Awards and Decorations (per DD...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500207

Original file (ND1500207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501298

Original file (ND1501298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB’s review is limited to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge by its governing regulations and, therefore, has no authority to change a service member’s discharge status from an administrative separation to a retirement. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500903

Original file (ND1500903.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300365

Original file (ND1300365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001986

Original file (ND1001986.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901665

Similar Decisions