Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102123
Original file (ND1102123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110919
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)        200 8 031 7 - 20080318     Active:            20060927 - 20070216

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080319     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080912      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 25 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 44
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A    OTA: N/A

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

20080822: For the following deficiencies in your performance and/or conduct: medical diagnosis with ICD-301.8, resulting in your inability to adjust to the demands of Navy life.

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 15560D), Change 23, effective 29 May 2008 until 20 August 2009, 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.        Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.
2.       Applicant contends her discharge was improper in that she was promised a transfer to the Navy Reserve upon reenlistment.
3.       NDRB Issue: Applicant’s discharge was inequitable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1004             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 g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. Although the Applicant’s service records are incomplete (missing administrative separation documentation to include: notification of administrative separation and acknowledgment of rights forms, commanding officer comments and endorsement, and the Separation Authority decision letter), the Board completed a thorough review of the available documentation to determine whether her discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service contained one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning (for diagnosis of P ersonality D isorder) , but did not reflect any commanding officer nonjudicial punishment (NJP) or trial by courts-martial. The record indicated the Applicant was previously enlisted in the Navy from 27 September 2006 to 16 February 2007, a period of 4 months, 20 days. On or about 25 January 2007, she was evaluated by a staff psychiatrist and diagnosed with Major Depression (single episode, moderate), Dysthymic Disorder (depressive neurosis) , and Personality Disorder. She was recommended for expeditious adminis trative separation and was subsequently discharged with an Honorable characterization of service on 16 February 2007 due to Personality Disorder (RE-4 reenlistment code) .

After her discharge from the Navy, the Applicant attended therapy from February to May 2007. In the spring of 2008, she was granted an enlistment waiver and allowed to reenlist in the Navy on 19 March 2008. The Applicant’s medical record contained a 4 August 2008 medical exam (DD Form 280701) that contained the following comments from the physician: “Prior enlistment patient was diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder and Major Depression. Was admin i strativel y separated in 2007 with RE code 4. Erroneously allowed to reenlist within 1 year of discharge. Patient currently being admin separated again.” On 21 August 2008, the Applicant’s command received a recommendation for administrative separation of the Applicant from the Officer in Charge of the Gulfport, MS Naval Branch Health Clinic. The recommendation stated , “(The Applicant ) was seen for a medical evaluation at this facility on 14 August 2008. The patient has been diagnosed with Major Depression Recurrent without Psychotic Feature and Borderline Personality Disorder. She has a pattern of recurrent depressive symptoms, to include suicide attempt by overdose, and also, diagnosed with a personality disorder which became evident to the military in early 2007. She was expeditiously administratively separated from Naval service in 2007 for these symptoms and reenlisted under false pretense. My clinical impressions were: AXIS I: Major Depression recurrent with psychotic features; AXIS II: Borderline Personality Disorder. The clinical opinion is that the member is not considered mentally ill, but manifests a long standing pattern of behavior which is of such severity as to render the individual incapable of serving adequately in any capacity in the U.S. Navy. ”

On 22 August 2008, the Applicant received a NAVPERS 1070 (Page 13) retention warning for ICD Code 301.8 ( P ersonality D isorder ). Based on the Applicant’s medical diagnoses, performance in service, the medical officer’s recommendation, and the Applicant’s potential for future service, the Applicant’s command processed her for administrative separation. Since the NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package documentation available for review, it could not d etermine whether the Applicant exercised or waived her 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 12 September 2008 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Personality Disorder.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade 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. 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge was improper in that she was promised a transfer to the Navy Reserve upon reenlistment. The NDRB is not an investigative body, and allegations of command legal or administrative impropriety should be made to the Naval Inspector General ’ s Office. Allegations notwithstanding, the Board conducted a detailed review of the Applicant’s records to determine whether her discharge met the pertinent standards for propriety and equity. The NDRB located the Applicant’s 19 March 2008 reenlistment contract documentation , and it clearly indicated the Applicant was enlisting in the active duty Navy . Moreover, the documentation clearly reflects the Applicant signed a 24 month extension to her four - year enlistment contract for an enlistment bonus of $7000. After exhaustive review, the Board could find no evidence to support her claim. The Applicant submitted a personal statement to the B oard but did not submit any credible evidence to support her claim of an improper or deceptive enlistment. Accordingly, and with no evidence within the records or submitted by the Applicant to rebut or otherwise question the presumption of regularity in this case, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s issue did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted. Relief denied.

: ( Board Issue ) ( ) . The NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge was inequitable. In conducting a review of the Applicant’s record of service, the Board noted there was no evidence of misconduct or other significant negative aspects that warranted a General discharge. Per Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-122, a Sailor administratively separated for P ersonality D isorder normally rates an Honorable characterization of service unless a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted. W hen a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under H onorable conditions. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s service record. After detailed analysis and careful consideration of the available documentation, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge, although proper, was inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted unanimously to upgrade the Applicant’s characterization of service to Honorable. R elief warranted.

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 the discharge was proper but not equitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101616

    Original file (MD1101616.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, the NDRB found that the narrative reason shall change to Secretarial Authority. Relief not warranted for the character of service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and medical and record entries, the Board found the discharge was improper. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300965

    Original file (ND1300965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301244

    Original file (ND1301244.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was afforded the opportunity to rebut his administrative separation at the time of notification, but he waived his rights and accepted his command’s recommendation of an Honorable discharge for Personality Disorder.However, per MILPERSMAN Article 1910-122, “separation for personality disorder is not appropriate when separation is warranted for any other reason….” With the Applicant’s diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder and recommendation for separation, he met the requirements for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201795

    Original file (ND1201795.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends she should have received a medical discharge and not one for Personality Disorder. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201286

    Original file (ND1201286.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600255

    Original file (MD0600255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    and pt. Naval Hospital, Okinawa, M. W_: S: Pt (Applicant) seen in follow up denying any further suicidal/homicidal ideation or depressive symptoms since last appointment. In the Applicant’s issue that the narrative reason for discharge should be depression instead of personality disorder, the Board found that the Applicant was diagnosed with " Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified with Passive/Aggressive Traits " by competent medical authority at the Psychiatric Clinic, U. S. Naval...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401067

    Original file (ND1401067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s diagnosis of Personality Disorder by competent medical authority, command administratively processed 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101033

    Original file (MD1101033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the medical and service records are incomplete, available evidence indicates the Applicant was administratively processed for separation due to Personality Disorder. Accordingly, the Board found that relief was warranted on the basis of equity, and the characterization of service will be changed to Honorable. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102153

    Original file (ND1102153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits.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 remain.The Applicant remains eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201492

    Original file (ND1201492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall HONORABLE.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...