Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001697
Original file (ND1001697.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100622
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)        19980106 - 19980107     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19980108     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19990407      Highest Rank/Rate: SA
Length of Service : Y ear M onth s 00 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 68
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

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

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 22, effective 15 December 1998 until
21 August 2002, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.
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 contends mental illness/schizophrenia led to the misconduct for which he was separated.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 09 08             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 identif ied one decisional issue for the Board ’s consideration . The Board noted the Applicant’s service records were incomplete , h owever, the Board conducted a thorough review of the available records to determine whether discharge and the discharge process met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service contained no documentation of NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warnings, commanding officer nonjudicial punishment (NJP), or trial by court s -martial. The records did reveal the Applicant was referred for mental health ev aluation at Naval Training Center (NTC) San Diego, on 15 Jun 1998, after complaining of insomnia and waking difficulty at sick call. After completing the evaluation, the psychologist reported the following findings: AXIS I: Schizoid traits . The physician stated the Applicant’s “pattern of scores is suggestive of emphasized, dramatic schizoid adjustment . F it for duty . P atient denies any psychological problems ; n o further psychological intervention necessary at this time.” The records also reveal the Applicant underwent another mental health evaluation at NTC San Diego, on 3 Sep 1998, after “legal referral” for being placed on restriction after return from unauthorized absence (UA). After completing the evaluation, the psychologis t reported the following: AXIS I: Dyssomnia; AXIS II: No formal diagnosis; AXIS III: None Known; AXIS IV: None, routine military service . The physician stated the Applicant “is fit for duty. Denies any psychological problems ; n o further psychological intervention necessary at this time. ” On 2 Apr 1999, the Applicant received a pre-confinement physical that found him “fit for bread and water punishment and fit for full duty . ” On 5 Apr 1999, the Applicant received a separation physical in which he reported no significant health issues and in which the physician found no significant h ealth issues other than a previously diagnosed sleep disorder . The Applicant was found fit for separation. Although the Applicant’s DD-214 indicates the Applicant was separated for Pattern of Misconduct, t he Applicant’s records did not contain the admi nistrative separation documents; hence, the NDRB could not determine whether the Applicant exercised or waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review . The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 7 Apr 1999 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Mi sconduct.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends mental illness/schizophrenia led to the misconduct for which he was separated. 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. There is evidence within the medical record that the Applicant was diagnosed with a dyssomnia and exhibited some form of schizoid traits. However, no formal diagnosis could be found within the record nor any documentation submitted by the Applicant to substantiate the Applicant’s claim of mental illness. In fact, each mental health evaluation (15 Jun 1998 and 3 Sep 1998) , the confinement physical (2 Apr 1999) , and the 5 Apr 1999 separation physical located in the record found the Applicant fit for full duty. Further, DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change. After considering all the available evidence, and with no other documentation to question the presumption of regularity, the Board determined this issue did not provide a basis for which relief cou ld be granted. Relief denied.


Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice and r ecord e ntries , 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100804

    Original file (ND1100804.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Patient is recommended for administrative separation due to Schizoid Personality Disorder … . ” Based on the medical diagnosis and recommendations from the Mental Health physicians, the Applicant’s command administratively processed him for separation. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900910

    Original file (ND0900910.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 misconduct, but in her case, the characterization of service should be the “type warranted by service record.” However, in the absence of the Applicant’s performance evaluations, the Board presumed regularity and found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101299

    Original file (ND1101299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service records contain the 25 July 1997 administrative separation notification form that states the Applicant was being processed for administrative separation from the Navy on the basis of personality disorder (as evidenced by mental health evaluation of 14 July 1997). Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and medical record entries, documentation submitted by the Applicant,and the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501168

    Original file (ND0501168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On DD Form 2807, Question 17g, the Applicant denied having ever been evaluated or treated for a mental condition. The Applicant's DD Form 214, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, indicates he was separated by reason of defective enlistment –fraudulent entry. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than one month in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03334

    Original file (BC-2006-03334.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant was discharged on 25 Aug 99 with an honorable discharge with the narrative reason of Personality Disorder. On 20 Sep 06, the applicant’s counselor/psychotherapist again wrote that “she does not meet the criteria as having Schizoid Personality Disorder.” He did not provide any diagnosis. The preponderance of evidence of record shows that the applicant’s reason for separation was appropriately assigned at the time of separation, although a member with the same condition nine...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400774

    Original file (ND1400774.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Further, his commanding officer stated that “these difficulties continue to surface and are currently hindering his performance and his ability to adapt to the life in the Navy.” 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 remain .Since 15 years have elapsed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00433

    Original file (ND02-00433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SA, USN Docket No. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 991117 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to being absent without leave - 30 days or more (A). While in the service, the Applicant was diagnosed by competent medical authority and provided with the appropriate treatment.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201037

    Original file (ND1201037.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 | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01063

    Original file (ND01-01063.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pt fit for duty psychiatrically, pt should continue evaluation by neurology for her headaches. Relief based on this issue of propriety is not warranted.The applicant’s second issue states: “This discharge is improper because it clearly states in section i, Personality Disorder in SECNAVINST 1910.4B Part 1 reasons for separation, that a separation is not appropriate when separation is warranted on the basis of unsatisfactory performance or misconduct. The summary of service clearly...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700546

    Original file (MD0700546.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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: USMCR (DEP)19950924 - 19951105 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19951106Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge:...