Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301810
Original file (ND1301810.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PR2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130911
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)        19980925 - 19981028     Active:   19981029 - 20021031

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021101     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040409      Highest Rank/Rate: PR2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 71
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.67 ( 3 )     Behavior: 2.67 ( 3 )       OTA: 3.33

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

Periods of UA /C ONF :

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:

          “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 981029 UNTIL 021 031 ”

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:                  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.        The Applicant seeks to use his full Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) education benefits.
2 .       The Applicant contends he was never punished or reduced in rank for misconduct .
3.       The Applicant contends his service in a hazardous duty zone and subsequent Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) warrant an upgrade .
Decision

Date : 20 1 4 0403             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 acc ordance 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. A review of the Applicant’s records shows that he deployed in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.

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 discharg e 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 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 e quity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service in his current enlistment included no NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial . However , the Applicant provided a urine sample that tested positive for methamphetamine on 16 January 2004. The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver prior to entering the Navy for possession of marijuana under one ounce and an associated civil fine . Based on the violation of the Navy’s zero-tolerance drug policy, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administra tive board . The Applicant’s administrative board found by a vote of 3-0 that the preponderance of the evident supported his misconduct, recommended his separation, and recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to use his full VA education benefits. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. The 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was never punished or reduced in rank for misconduct. The Applicant’s record of service shows he provided a urine sample that tested positive for methamphetamine on 16 January 2004. This is a violation of the Navy’s zero-tolerance drug policy and requires mandatory processing for administrative separation. In accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual, servicemembers may be separated based on the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the commanding officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial for the same or closely related offense. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction, however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence , such as urinalysis results . His command leniently chose to administratively separate him from service rather than pursue punitive measures at a Special Court-Martial . The Applicant fully exercised his rights during the administrative separation process, and the administrative separation board leniently recommended a General discharge. The NDRB determined his discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his service in a hazardous duty zone and subsequent PTSD warrant an upgrade. The Applicant received an Honorable characterization of service for his first enlistment from October 1998 to October 2002. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his second enlistment, he tested positive for an illegal substance. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of the Navy’s zero-tolerance drug policy is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. This usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a spe cial or general court-martial.
The Applicant contends he suffers from PTSD as a result of serving on an aircraft carrier in a hazardous duty zone. Post-service medical records from the VA confirm a diagnosis of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (Not Otherwise Specified) and Polysubstance Abuse/Dependence (in reported remission). The records also note that the Applicant, as of January 2011, does not meet the diagnostic criteria for PTSD. Though the Applicant may feel that PTSD was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record reflects willful misconduct that demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. After a careful review of the records, the NDRB determined PTSD and service in a hazardous duty zone on an aircraft carrier did not mitigate his misconduct, and his discharge was proper and equitable. 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 a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 33, effective 22 August 2002 until 28 April 2005, 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500561

    Original file (ND1500561.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) determined relief is warranted based on equitable grounds based on Issue # 10 due to the Applicant’s service connected cognitive defects. Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101737

    Original file (MD1101737.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of making a former service member eligible to receive educational, medical, or any other veterans 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102142

    Original file (MD1102142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined that the evidence of record did establish the basis for discharge and that the Separation Authority actions were proper. ” 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 the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000486

    Original file (ND1000486.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200790

    Original file (MD1200790.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s record of service during the period under review, the NDRB determined that the Applicant had engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service and that the characterization of service received was warranted.As the Applicant requested a review of his discharge in order to facilitate access to VA benefit programs for help with PTSD issues, the NDRB conducted a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500297

    Original file (ND1500297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issue 2: (Decisional) (Board Issue) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. During the review of the Applicant’s request for an upgrade, the NDRB considered whether PTSD was a mitigation warranting a discharge upgrade. ” 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101208

    Original file (ND1101208.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief granted.Summary:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200041

    Original file (ND1200041.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The Applicant submitted one...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902188

    Original file (ND0902188.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member:Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500214

    Original file (ND1500214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...