Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300685
Original file (ND1300685.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130220
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:       CONVENIENCE OF THE NAVY

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20000426 - 20000516     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20000517     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20021219      Highest Rank/Rate: HN
Length of Service: Y e ar s M onth s 03 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 66
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.78

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- Date Not Found in Record :      Article (General A rticle - unauthorized disclosure of patient information)
         Awarded: ADMONITION Suspended: [Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated 20021219.]

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

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 134.


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends her discharge was based on mistreatment by her department head.
2.       The Applicant contends she was unable to adequately defend herself at Captain’s Mast.
3 .       The Applicant contends her in-service performance and conduct warrant consideration for an upgrade to Honorable.
4 .       The Applicant contends her post-service conduct warrants considerati on for an upgrade to Honorable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 1016             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 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board reviewed the Applicant ’ s record to see if she deployed in support of a contingency operation and was, as a consequence of that deployment, diagnosed with either PTSD or Traumatic Brain Injury . A review of her record revealed that she did not deploy 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).

 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. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Mi litary Justice (UCMJ): Article 134 (General A rticle , unauthorized disclosure of patient information). Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation . The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board . However, the Applicant’s separation code of GKQ on her DD Form 214 indicates she exercised her right to appear before an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge was based on mistreatment by her de partment head . The Applicant stated she was harassed and discriminated against based on her gender. The Applicant further claims she was wrongly charged with, and subsequently separated for, unauthorized disclosure of patient information. 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 her issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that s he was wrongfully charged with violation of UCMJ Article 134 and wrongfully separated due to commission of a serious offense. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she was unable to adequat ely defend herself at Captain’s Mast following a sexual assault that she did not report. The NDRB did take into consideration the Applicant’s statement but determined it had no bearing on the propriety or equity of her discharge. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her in-service performance and conduct warrant consideratio n for an upgrade . The characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record, the NDRB determined her service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of h er conduct or performance outweighed the positive aspects of h er service, and the awarded characterization was warranted. Relief denied.

4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. After a careful review of the Applicant’s post-service documentation and official service records, and taking into consideration her personal statement, the statements of her character references, and the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined relief is warranted based on equitable grounds. The NDRB decided, by a vote of 3-2, to upgrade the characterization to Honorable and change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. Relief granted.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable a t the time of discharge. However, based on equitable grounds, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative re ason for separation shall change to . 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500055

    Original file (ND1500055.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s record of Administrative Board; however, the result of the Board was her administrative separation from the Navy with Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge for reason of drug abuse. 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 remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101400

    Original file (ND1101400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant wants her discharge upgraded so she can reenlist in the military.2. After a thorough review of the records and documentation provided by the Applicant, the NDRB determined that there was no evidence of an improper diagnosis of personality disorder while the Applicant was in service and saw no reason to change the narrative reason for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201079

    Original file (ND1201079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of controlled substances, to wit: cocaine 221 ng/ml) Awarded: Suspended: SCM: SPCM: CC:Retention Warning Counseling: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201280

    Original file (ND1201280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was not notified of separation processing for any of the narrative reasons requested by the Applicant and so they are not applicable.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 that while discharge was warranted, it was not warranted for Fraudulent Enlistment. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101449

    Original file (ND1101449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends her discharge was based on an isolated incident and only minor offenses in 41 months of service. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301390

    Original file (ND1301390.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends she had no misconduct to warrant a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. Based on the Applicant’s medical board determination, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001313

    Original file (ND1001313.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 | 2013_Navy | ND1300216

    Original file (ND1300216.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was processed for a medical board by proper authority. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102011

    Original file (ND1102011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to:Medical discharge Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:NONE Active: 20090527-20100119 (HON) Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20090514Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20100802Highest Rank/Rate: HNLength of Service: Inactive: Year(s) Month(s) 26 Day(s) Active Year(s) Month(s) 23 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101973

    Original file (ND1101973.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20050517 - 20060109Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060110Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090413Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 04 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 54EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(3)Behavior:3.3(3)OTA: 3.66Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):...