Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400893
Original file (ND1400893.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CTISA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140402
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)        20070623 - 20080812     Active:  

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20080813     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120601      Highest Rank/Rate: CTISN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 19 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 78
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.33

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:

- 201 2 04 09 :      Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances)
          Awarded: Suspended:

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends her in-service conduct is worthy of consideration for an upgrade .
2. The Applicant contends she was treated unfairly by members of her command.
3 .       The Applicant contends she suffered a lot of setbacks due to sexual assault and dealing with a newborn and her daughter’s father.

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0904            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 P ost-Traumatic Stress Disorder (P TSD ) to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) , 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. 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 T raumatic 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 Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , ) . Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. 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 and submit a written statement . However, per the Applicant ’ s DD Form 214, the Separation Code HKK in dicates the Applicant waived her right to an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her in-service conduct is worthy of consideration for an upgrade . Based on the Applicant’s record of service and after reviewing the documentation submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined the Applicant 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 the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she was treated unfairly by members of her command. 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 h er issue. In addition to t he Applicant ’s statement, she provided a statement from a Petty Officer Second Class detailing the command climate at Fort Gordon . These statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the co ntention the command treated her unfairly. The Applicant’s service included one NJP for violation of UCMJ Article 112a. 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 special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Relief denied.



: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she suffered a lot of setbacks due to sexual assault and dealing with a newborn and her daughter’s father. A review of the Applicant’s medical records found no reference to either sexual assault or PTSD, however, the VA rated her as 70% disabled due to PTSD. While the Applicant may feel that her personal problems were contributing factor s to her misconduct, they do not mitigate her disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the Naval Service, demonstrating she was unsuitable for further service. The Applicant’s misconduct of abusing drugs was a conscious decision to violate the ten ets of honorable and faithful service. After a thorough review of the records, the NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate her misconduct, and her discharge was warranted, 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.


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 | ND1401695

    Original file (ND1401695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401060

    Original file (ND1401060.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to receive service benefits.2. There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical separation by proper authority. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400745

    Original file (MD1400745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the available records and statements submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined PTSD and TBI did not mitigate his misconduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400258

    Original file (ND1400258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, as a result of the PTSD claim, the NDRB included a psychiatrist on the board.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301026

    Original file (ND1301026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500203

    Original file (ND1500203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .By a vote of the Reenlistment Code shall .Discussion 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501007

    Original file (ND1501007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400501

    Original file (ND1400501.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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400904

    Original file (ND1400904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20100105 - 20100702Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20100703Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20130418Highest Rank/Rate:ACANLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 19 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 87EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(3)Behavior:2.3(3)OTA: 2.87Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400487

    Original file (MD1400487.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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...