Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000773

Original file (ND1000773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ABHAN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100126

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)        20050429 - 20051018     Active: USAF 19930727 - 19970730 (HON)

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20051019     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080513      Highest Rank/Rate: ABHAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 15 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 54
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.5 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.21 (4)

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF : (Time Lost, reason unknown) 20080419 - 20080428 (9 days)

NJP :

S CM :    SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20080403 :       For Psychologist evaluation of 1 Apr 2008 for Adjustment Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder. (The Applicant annotated in writing on NAVPERS 1070/613 that he desired to be separated from the Navy) .
Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR ISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR ISM SERVICE MEDAL SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON ”

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19930727 UNTIL 19970730 ”

         Block 12d, Total Prior Active Service should read: “YRS, 04; MONTHS, 00; DAYS, 04”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, 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:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation :          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 16 effective 24 July 2006 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. Applicant seeks a change to RE code to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 03 03 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 did not identify any decisional issues for the Board ’s consideration . However, the Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning (1 Apr 2008) for his mental health evaluation of Adjustment Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder. The available records did not reflect any commanding officer’s nonjudicial punishment or trials by courts-martial , though there was a period of time lost, 20080419-20080428 (9 days), with no specifics provided. Based on the staff psychologist’s mental health evaluation and recommendation for separation from the Navy, the Applicant’s command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 2 Apr 2008 , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change to his RE code to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to reenlistment codes. The NDRB only looks at the propriety and equity of a discharge. The Applicant has already received an Honorable discharge from his naval service . As for his Narrative Reason for Separation, he was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder and was properly given the reason of Condition, Not a Disability on his DD Form 214. Th e NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of G overnmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant , in his letter to the Board, referred to a series of incidents involving a clothes iron and personnel aboard his ship that precipitated his request to be released from the Navy. There was a mental health evaluation conducted on 1 Apr 2008 after the Applicant referred himself due to “…a desire to starve himself and jump from the ship” stating that he “can’t be on the ship anymore” and that “…he wanted to go home to live with/near his mother and get his old job back at K-Mart . ” The staff psychologist discovered that the Applicant had been evaluated and treated for depression and stress (including prescription medications) by a psychiatrist for approximately six months prior to joining the Navy, which he did not reveal during the enlistment accession process. Additionally, it was noted that the Applicant had previously consulted with the ship’s psych tech on 17 Dec 2001 and 10 Jan 2008 for stress. After thorough evaluation, the staff psychologist recommended to the Applicant’s commanding officer that h e be separated from the Navy due to the severity of his condition and the Applicant’s inability to serve effectively and remain in the Navy. After a detailed examination of all the available documentation, to include the letter submitted b y the Applicant, the Board found no evidence of impropriety leading up to his administrative separation for a condition, not a disability.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries and administrative separation 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 for additional information.

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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201034

Original file (ND1201034.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600966

Original file (ND0600966.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 equitable.. Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19920619 - 19920622 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19920623Years Contracted:Date of Discharge:19930910 Length of Service: Active 01 Yrs 02Mths18...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101724

Original file (ND1101724.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After review of all the available evidence, to include documentation submitted on behalf of the Applicant, the Board found that the Applicant was responsible for his actions and that PTSD and TBI did not mitigate the misconduct for which he was separated.Accordingly, the NDRB determined the Applicant’sdischarge was proper and equitable per the applicable orders and directives in effect at the time of his separation, and this issue did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted,...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801719

Original file (ND0801719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided limited documentation of post service accomplishments. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001058

Original file (ND1001058.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an upgrade to obtain VA medical benefits.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation (in absentia)process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500459

Original file (ND1500459.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Related 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: Types of Witnesses Who Testified Expert: Character: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Summary:...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901028

Original file (MD0901028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. 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 | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700783

Original file (ND0700783.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19830216 - 19830217 Active: 19830218 - 19870122 19870123 - 19901030 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19901031 Years Contracted: ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 19930820 Length of Service: 02 Yrs 09 Mths 20...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902480

Original file (MD0902480.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100662

Original file (ND1100662.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an RE code and discharge upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and record entries, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000773

Similar Decisions