Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101624
Original file (ND1101624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AZAN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110621
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)        19990714 - 20000508     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20000509     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20031001      Highest Rank/Rate: AZ3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 23 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 32
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.8 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.04

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (3) (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20020913 :      Article (Disorderly conduct)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20030903 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Class Charlie Liberty Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :     

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20020913 :       For disorderly conduct.
 - 20030903 :       For failure to obey order or regulation.

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 :        




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks an upgrade in characterization of service in order to be eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) educational benefits.

2.       Decisional issues : The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of service at discharge, contending that Post - Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (not combat - related) caused bad decision making that r esulted in the misconduct of record.

Decision

Date : 20 1 1 1019            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 NDRB 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 Applicant identified one decisional issue for consideration by the NDRB; additionally, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant provide d additional documentation regarding post - service Department of Veterans Affairs disability determination (PTSD – non - combat related) for the NDRB’s consideration .

The Applicant entered military service at age 1 9 on a four-year enlistment in the Seafarer to Airman school program ; s he completed three year s and four months of h er service obligation before being discharged. The Applicant’s original enlistment acceptance into the Navy included a waiver to enlistment and induction standards for assault . The Applicant’s official record of service during h er enlistment period contains two NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention-counseling warnings. The Applicant ’ s service record included two nonjudicial punishments for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) : Article 134 ( D isorderly conduct) and Article 92 (Failure to obey orders or regulation) .

The Applicant was discharged from the Naval Service due to Misconduct , specifically, having established a pattern of misconduct as defined by Article 1910-140 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN). The NDRB was unable to review the Applicant’s entire discharge package as portions were not included in her official service record; however, the Applicant’s notification and election of rights were available for review. The Applicant was notified, in writing, of the c ommand’s intent to administratively discharge her for Misconduct (Patter n of Misconduct) and that the least favorable characterization of service warranted was General (Under Honorable Conditions). The Applicant elected to waive her right s to consult with legal counsel or to provide a statement to the Separation Authority for consideration in determining her characterization of service or matters of retention. The Separation Authority reviewed the Applicant’s record of service during h er enlistment period , determin ing that the Applicant’s documented misconduct of record did establish the minimum requirement for discharge based on a pattern of misconduct; that separation in the Applicant’s case was warranted; and further, that the proposed characterization of service - General (Under Honorable Conditions) - was warranted. As such, the Separation Authority directed the Applicant be discharged for the reason as stated and that s he receive an RE-4 reenlistment code (not recommended for reenlistment).
(Nondecisional Issue) The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of h er service at discharge in order to facilitate access to VA education benefits. T he NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities or Veterans Affairs benefits. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge.
(Decisional Issue ) ( ) . The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of service at discharge, contending that PTSD (not combat - related) caused bad decision making .

Propriety - The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. In accordance with the MILPERSMAN, a service member may be discharged, involuntarily, when their conduct or performance of duties meets one of the established reasons for separation. The Applicant was discharged from the Naval Service due to having established a pattern of misconduct as defined by Article 1910-140 of the MILPERSMAN. Although the administrative discharge was the result of misconduct, it was not part of a punitive punishment awarded at a trial by court-martial, which could have resulted in a substantially more harsh discharge. The Separation Authority reviewed the Applicant’s record of service during the enlistment period, determining that the Applicant’s documented record of misconduct established the minimum requirements for discharge based on a pattern of misconduct. The Separation Authority further determined that retention in the Applicant’s case was not warranted and that the proposed characterization of service was proper . Based upon the available service records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. T he Applicant received two formal retention-counseling warning s during h er enlistment , which she violated with continued misconduct . After a detailed review of the facts, circumstances, and issues unique to this discharge action, the NDRB determined that the Applicant was discharged properly in accordance with the MILPERSMAN. R elief based on propriety is not warranted.

 Equity - Based on the pattern of misconduct committed during the Applicant’s current enlistment, the command recommended separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service at discharge. The Separation Authority reviewed the evidence of record and the established pattern of misconduct and concurred. A service member’s characterization of service at discharge is recognition of performance and conduct during an enlistment; it is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation or any previous periods of honorable service. When the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, it is appropriate to characterize that period of service under honorable conditions. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duties outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s record of performance and conduct reflected a documented pattern of misconduct - willful violations of the UCMJ based on an inability to comply with rules and regulation.
The Applicant was assaulted while deployed; since discharge , she has been diagnosed with service - related PTSD as a result of th e assault and was found to be 30% disable d . The NDRB reviewed the Department of Veterans Affairs C ompensation and P ension E xam results and accompanying medical records; however, the NDRB determined that the PTSD was not a mitigating reason for disorderly conduct , violation of retention counseling warnings, or for willful viol ation of orders and regulations.

After reviewing the Applicant’s official service record and supporting documentation, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the characterization of service, was honest and faithful . However, the documented misconduct was a significant negative aspect of the member’s conduct and performance of duty and did outweigh the positive aspects of h er service record. As such, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s misconduct did constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service and that the characterization of service at discharge was appropriate, was equitable, and was consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. The NDRB determined that an upgrade would be inappropriate; accordingly, relief is denied.

Summary : After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and the discharge process, the NDRB found that the discharge was proper and equitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of the discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews and Post-Service Conduct .
Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 .




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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000472

    Original file (ND1000472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Nondecisional issues: the Applicant seeks a change to his reenlistment code and narrative reason for discharge as prescribed on his Form DD-214 by his chain of command in order to reenlist and/or better facilitate government/contractor employment opportunities.2. The Separation Authority reviewed the evidence of record and the gravity of the charges and directed that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400279

    Original file (ND1400279.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant implied in her DD Form 293 statement that her PTSD was not a result of a deployment in support of a contingency operation, and so her case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1).However, based on the Applicant’s claim of PTSD due to a sexual assault, the Naval Discharge Review Board included a psychiatrist on the board.The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800496

    Original file (ND0800496.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19980710 - 19990706 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990707Period of enlistment: Years+ 12 month extensionDate of Discharge:20040514Length of Service: Yrs Mths08 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 54Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Evaluation marks:Performance: 3.0(5) Behavior:2.4(5)OTA: 3.01 (5)Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):,,and Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801948

    Original file (ND0801948.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001370

    Original file (ND1001370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 04 June 2004, the Separation Authority directed the Applicant’s discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse); he further directed that the Applicant be assigned an RE-4 re-entry code (not recommended for reenlistment).The Applicant provided additional documentation ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400928

    Original file (ND1400928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of misconduct and counselling warnings clearly meets the Navy’s standard for administrative separation for reason of a pattern of misconduct in accordance with regulations. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that PTSD was the cause of his pattern of misconduct.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901215

    Original file (ND0901215.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1102049

    Original file (ND1102049.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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902031

    Original file (ND0902031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service at discharge, reflected honest and faithful service, but that significant negative aspects of the Applicant’s conduct and performance of duties outweighed the positive aspects of his military record.By a vote of 3-2, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101529

    Original file (ND1101529.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Department of Veterans Affairs provided the Applicant’s official medical records for the Board’s review. Based on the medical and service documentation of record, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s diagnosed PTSD (non-combat related) was a mitigating and contributing factor associated with his in-service misconduct; however, the NDRB did not consider the issue of PTSD as a reason to absolve completely the Applicant of his misconduct and determined an upgrade to Honorable would not be...