Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401377
Original file (ND1401377.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-OSSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140718
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)        20010810 - 20011104     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011105     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050730      Highest Rank/Rate: OSSN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 32
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.84
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     
Periods of UA /C ONF : UA: 20040811-20050801, 355 days / CONF:

NJP :

- 20030122 :      Article (Absence without leave 20030102-20030105, 3 days)
         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:

         “ 02 09 02 ”
         “ MISCONDUCT (AWOL) ”
         “ TL: 03JAN02 TO 03JAN04; 04AUG11 TO 05AUG01 ”

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 :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008,
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 86 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends her discharge is inequitable because the underlying cause for her misconduct was post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from surgery, and physical and mental health issues.

Decision

Date : 20 1 4 1106             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason 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. 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 proprie ty. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave; 3 days). The Applicant violated article 86 again when she absented herself from her unit on 11 August 2004 and remained absent for 355 days until her discharge in absentia from the Navy on 30 July 2005. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

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 TBI. 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)."
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge is inequitable because the underlying cause for her misconduct was post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from surgery, and physical and mental health issues. The Applicant submitted to the NDRB her medical records showing she underwent emergency surgery for a ruptured hemorrhagic ovarian cyst at the Naval Medical Center, San Diego. After surgery, the Applicant was referred to the Mental Health Unit for psychiatric evaluation because she complained of nightmares and flashbacks. The Applicant was diagnosed with Axis I: PTSD as a result of her surgical procedures. The Applicant suggests that her mental and physical condition left her unable to perform her military duties, and she began a period of absence without leave from her unit that eventually resulted in her administrative discharge for misconduct. The NDRB tried to obtain the Applicant’s full service medical records, but the Department of Veterans Affairs was unable to locate them; therefore the NDRB could not determine whether the Applicant began treatment for PTSD in service, or why she felt that leaving the Navy without authority in violation of the UCMJ was a better solution to her mental and physical health problems. However, the Applicant remained absent from the Navy even after she was notified of the administrative discharge process . The Applicant acknowledged her rights in the process, and waived her right to an administrative board, thus accepting the recommended discharge from her command. In their review, the NDRB determined that insufficient evidence was presented to mitigate the Applicant’s misconduct, and that her misconduct was a willful violation of the UCMJ for which she was rightly held accountable for. Therefore, the NDRB determined her discharge was proper and equitable as issued. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (AWOL).

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of her 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500851

    Original file (ND1500851.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800619

    Original file (ND0800619.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700112

    Original file (ND0700112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) ) Administrative Board GCMCA review Administrative Board Date : NOT FOUND IN RECORD Findings, by preponderance of the evidence: NOT FOUND IN RECORDNOT FOUND IN RECORD Recommendation on Separation: NOT FOUND IN...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201952

    Original file (MD1201952.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority (CG, I MEF) reviewed the findings, noted that he considered her diagnosis of non-combat PTSD, and ordered the Applicant to be separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) character of service for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).During her entire Marine Corps service, the Applicant had no misconduct resulting in NJP or court-martial, though she received five 6105 retention warnings related to her work performance. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301895

    Original file (ND1301895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends she was being processed for discharge for a physical or mental condition prior to her discharge for a pattern of misconduct.2. ” 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...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500558

    Original file (ND1500558.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900580

    Original file (ND0900580.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a review of the Applicant’s service record, statement, facts unique to this case, and mitigating factors such as the short duration of the Applicant’s UAs and her mental state at the time of discharge, the Board also voted unanimously to change the characterization of discharge. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall change to Honorable and the narrative reason for separation shall change to Secretarial Authority. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other...

  • 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...