Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201184
Original file (ND1201184.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BM2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120501
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)        19860812 - 19870210     Active:            198 70211 - 19 900709
                                             19900710 - 19950706

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 19950707     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19990603      Highest Rank/Rate: BM2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 28 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 90
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: NOB    OTA: 4.0 0 4.0 EVAL
         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )     Behavior: 2.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.81 5.0 EVALS
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (3)

Periods of UA /C ONF : UA (72 days) 19990224-19990506; (9 days) 19981201-19981209 / CONF: NONE

NJP:     SCM:     SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling:

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ 99FEB24 TO 99MAY06, 98DEC01 TO 98DEC09 ”

 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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant wants to receive medical benefits to treat h is Post - Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
 2.       The Applic ant contends his PTSD led to his cocaine use.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0913             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
Discussion

 As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD, in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist. In accordance with section 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution. The Applicant did not deploy in support of a contingency operation and claims the traumatic event occurred while conducting Navy diving operations in Honduras.

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. The Applicant’s record of service did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, non-judicial punishments (NJP) , or trials by court-martial for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) . However, his service record does reflect two violations of Article 86 (Absence without leave , 9 days and 72 days) . It also reflects a violation of Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of a controlled substance, cocaine). None of these violations w ere adjudic ated through NJP or court-martial proceedings. The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana p rior to entering the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant right to request an administrative board . The Administrative Separation Board voted to discharge the Applicant U nder O ther T han H onorable C onditions.

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant wants to receive medical benefits from the VA. T here is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of facilitating access to VA medical benefits. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. T his issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his PTSD led to his cocaine use. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. The Applican t did not provide any documentary evidence to support his claim that PTSD led to his cocaine use . The NDRB did however find documentation in the Applicant’s medical record indicating h e had been diagnosed with PTSD while on active duty and had received medical treatment. The Board found no evidence to support his claim that PTSD caused hi m to use cocaine and no evidence indicating he was not responsible for his actions. The Applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. W hen reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. However, the Board generally does not consider the circumstances surrounding an Applicant’s stated condition, the implied incorrect diagnosis, nor the medical treatment given to the Applicant to be of sufficient nature to exculpate the misconduct. PTSD is not a valid reason to wrongfully use controlled substances , especially when the Navy has extensive resources available to service members who have mental and physical conditions. In th is case , t he Applicant had been receiv ing medical treatment but still chose to use cocaine. The Board determined the Applicant’s PTSD did not mitigate his misconduct. Relief denied.


Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord entries, 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 for more information.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 24, effective 20 May 1999 until
26 March 2000, Article 1910-146, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE.
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), 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100622

    Original file (ND1100622.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities. 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 . ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700471

    Original file (ND0700471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, this misconduct substantiates the reason for his separation as well as his characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19940513) Separation Authority (date): BUPERS WASHINGTON DC (19940615)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 19940622 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801225

    Original file (ND0801225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700333

    Original file (ND0700333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board construed this issue to mean that, had the Applicant not extended his enlistment, he would have reached his EAS and been discharged for that reason, with a characterization based on his service record, rather than for misconduct and an other than honorable characterization of service. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.In reviewing discharges,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500160

    Original file (ND1500160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant wants an upgrade of his discharge to be eligible for Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits. ” 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400224

    Original file (ND1400224.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000549

    Original file (MD1000549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB thoroughly examined the Applicant’s record of service and found no documented evidence of misconduct, counseling warnings, or medical evaluations that would support his claim that he suffered from the effects of PTSD after his return from Iraq. Though no significant medical or mental health issues were evident at the time of his separation, and even if combat or other service-related medical issues did exist, DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600018

    Original file (ND0600018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. CM continues to follow.040513: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse, that such misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. Therefore, I concur with the Administrative Board and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300463

    Original file (ND1300463.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand 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 hearing for a period of fifteen years...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700996

    Original file (MD0700996.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to warrant mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...