Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301026
Original file (ND1301026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DCFA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130321
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)        20110118 - 20111024     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20111025     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20130219      Highest Rank/Rate: DCFN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 59
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.75

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

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20130207 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    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:

          “ 01 03 26 ”
          “ JKQ ”
          “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”
         
The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, PERS-312A, 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:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 36, effective 18 August 2011 until Present, 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 92 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends her chain of command conducted unduly and unjust actions against her, she was charged with fraternization as a result of reporting a sexual assault, and was subsequently diagnosed with depression, Panic Disorder, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and Borderline Personality Disorder.
Decision

Date: 20 1 3 1219             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 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 deploy in support of a contingency operation, however, her claim of PTSD is based on alleged military sexual trauma. The Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist and expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution.
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 include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The 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 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation). Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant excercised right to consult with a qualified counsel but waived her rights to submit a written statement and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her chain of command conducted unduly and unjust actions against her, she was charged with fraternization as a result of reporting a sexual assault, and was subsequently diagnosed with depression, Panic Disorder, PTSD, and Borderline Personality Disorder. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary. 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 the command treated her unfairly or that she was charged with fraternization as a result of reporting a sexual assault. What the record does reveal is that the Applicant pled guilty at NJP of having an unduly familiar relationship with two Second Class Petty Officers within her division, which is a violation of the Navy’s fraternization policy. Misconduct of this severity typically results in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. However, her command leniently recommended a General discharge. A clinical psychologist’s diagnosis from 21 November 2012 states that the Applicant “clearly meets criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder…. She does have traits of PTSD from recent and remote sexual assault….” The NDRB, however, found no indication that the Applicant was not responsible for her actions or should not be held accountable for her misconduct of fraternizing with two petty officers in her division on multiple occasions, per her admission. The NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate her misconduct and further determined she received a lenient, proper, and equitable discharge. Relief denied.

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 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 15 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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400017

    Original file (MD1400017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Full relief to Honorable was not granted because the Applicant was still responsible for her behavior and had a documented pattern of misconduct during her enlistment.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 personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000782

    Original file (ND1000782.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. here is no evidence in the record nor provided by the Applicant regarding the disciplinary action taken against the officer by the command. ” 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301236

    Original file (ND1301236.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 entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews from the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001127

    Original file (ND1001127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends she was denied her right to counsel. The Applicant contends PTSD diagnosed in service mitigates her misconduct of record. ” 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500307

    Original file (ND1500307.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion As a result of the Applicant’s claim of PTSD due to military sexual trauma and in-service diagnosis of a personality disorder, 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. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400117

    Original file (MD1400117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, the letter states the Applicant is receiving treatment as a result of her sexual assault while in the Marine Corps. However, the Applicant bears some responsibility for missing required drills and not communicating with her command, and so a further upgrade to Honorable is not warranted.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 the discharge was proper but not...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200470

    Original file (MD1200470.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 | 2015_Navy | ND1501116

    Original file (ND1501116.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PERSONALITY DISORDER. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201010

    Original file (MD1201010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the Applicant’s service records and her statement, the NDRB noted that she was diagnosed while in service with non-combat-related PTSD, chronic mental illness, and major depression. ” 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...