Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400248
Original file (ND1400248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-STGSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20131127
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)        20030307 - 20031129     Active:            20031120 - 20071118

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20071119     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 2010061 1      Highest Rank/Rate: STG3
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 22 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 81
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.73

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (3) NEM (2) (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20100319 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article (Assault)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    Retention Warning Counseling:

C C :

- 20100121 :       Offense: Abduction and felony malicious wounding

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):        20130301
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:   ND12-00704
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:                 Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.

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 031120 UNTIL 071118 ”
          “ ”
          “ 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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until 17 August 2011, 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 s 91 and 128 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends post - deployment medical issues , including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), mitigate his misconduct .
2.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0515            Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : DAV

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’s service record documents completion of a deployment in support of Navy Expeditionary Guard Battalion, Joint Task Force, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, from November 2006 to May 2007 and a deployment in support of Operation E NDURING FREEDOM to Afghanistan from 30 June 2008 to 05 January 2009.

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 in his current enlistment included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 1 specification ) and Article 128 ( Assault , 1 specific ation ) and one civilian conviction for abduction and felony malicious wounding. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. On 19 March 2010 w hen initially notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, sub mit a written statement, and request an administrative board . However, on 14 April 2010, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and re quest an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends post - deployment medical issues , including PTSD, mitigate his misconduct . When 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. The A pplicant ’s records show completion of a 9- month deployment to Cuba and an early departure , due to suicidal thoughts , from his deployment to Afghanistan . U pon departure from Afghanistan, the Applicant was assessed in Landstuhl, Germany and received follow-up treatment at Naval Medical Center Portsmouth in Jan uary 2009 . During the assessments, the Applicant was found to have in - service stressors from his deployment s as well as personal stressors resulting from two of his brothers being injured, an overpayment of $ 8,000 that was recouped by the military , and unfaithful relationships by his wife. Medical authorities diagnosed the Applicant with A nxiety Disorder and Adjustment Disorder with Anxious Mood . T he Applicant was recommended for follow-up psychiatric treatment and cleared for full duty. In reviewing the record as well as the personal testimony of the Applicant, the civilian offense that occurred in April 2009 was due to continued unfaithfulness and stress from his wife and not the result of post-deployment PTSD. After the civilian incident, it wasn’t until March 2010 that the Applicant had further misconduct , which led to an NJP and processing for administrative separation. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s records and after listening to his testimony, the NDRB determined PTSD and other post-deployment stressors and mental issues did not mitigate his misconduct and further determined his discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration for an upgrade. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a personal statement and testimony at his hearing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. The Board determined the Applicant’s personal statements at the hearing and documentation submitted by the Applicant do not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. 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 is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149. Their website can be found at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm . 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301527

    Original file (ND1301527.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After taking her sexual assault and deployment into consideration, the Separation Authority determined she warranted separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense) with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301842

    Original file (MD1301842.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority reviewed the separation process and board findings and ordered the Applicant to be discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. 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 personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500613

    Original file (MD1500613.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB also determined after an exhaustive and detailed review of the Applicant’s extensive service and medical records that the Applicant was: eligible for and requested administrative separation for medical reasons; was also being processed as a body composition program failure; in addition to his misconduct proceedings. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300297

    Original file (MD1300297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-service, the Applicant applied for clemency to the Naval Discharge Review Board, which granted an upgrade in the characterization of service to Under Other Than Honorable Conditions in September 2011.: (Decisional) () . Full relief to Honorable was not granted, because the Applicant had misconduct and was responsible for his actions.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, testimony, record entries, and discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200279

    Original file (MD1200279.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : (Decisional) () .The Applicant contends his in-service performance and conduct mitigates his misconduct.The Applicant received an Honorable discharge for his first enlistment from July 2001 to October 2004. There was no indication that he was not fully responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300362

    Original file (ND1300362.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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’s service record documents service as a Block Guard at Camp Deltain Guantanamo Bay, Cuba 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 discharge if such...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301441

    Original file (MD1301441.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1300917

    Original file (MD1300917.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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’s service record documents completion of two deployments to Iraq conducting combat operations in support of Operation IRAQI 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 discharge if...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500120

    Original file (MD1500120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200343

    Original file (MD1200343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of serviceincluded 6105 counseling retention warning and one Special Court-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 7 specifications: Wrongfully striking numerous recruits with excessive force to correct the position of the recruits, o/o 24 May-26 Jul 2008; wrongfully hazing numerous recruits, ordering recruits to fall from the standing position to their knees onto the cement ground, o/o...