ex-EN2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101108
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:	USNR (DEP)	20020731 - 20021103  	Active:		

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20021104	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years  14 MONTHS Extension
Date of Discharge:  20071214	Highest Rank/Rate:  EN2
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   11 Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  53
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  3.7 (3)	Behavior:  2.0 (3)	OTA:  3.09

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

Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJP:  	SCM:  	SPCM:  	CC:  	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.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 16, effective 24 July 2006 until 28 May 2008, Article 1910-122, Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s).

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.	Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to obtain veteran education benefits.  
2.	Applicant contends command legal and administrative impropriety caused overwhelming stress and led to her discharge.

Decision

Date:  20120216		Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  

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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Applicant identified one decisional issue for the Board’s consideration.  Although portions of the Applicant’s record were incomplete (missing administrative separation documentation to include: Page 13 retention warning(s) and the commanding officer administrative separation endorsement comments), the Board completed 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 did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warnings, commanding officer nonjudicial punishment (NJP), or trial by courts-martial.  The record did reveal that during the enlistment accession process, the Applicant admitted to using marijuana one time prior to entry into the Navy.  Documentation within the record indicates the Applicant was a capable Sailor within her occupational rating.  However, her Evaluation and Counseling Reports indicate she had failed three Physical Fitness Assessments (PFA) within a four year period.  Additionally, extensive medical documentation indicated the Applicant was evaluated and/or treated for depression, anxiety, and borderline personality disorder between 2005 and 2007.

In Oct 2005, the Applicant was referred to a mental health provider at Patrick AFB, FL and subsequently placed on antidepressant medication.  On 18 Nov 2005, she received a mental health evaluation at Naval Medical Center Portsmouth (NMCP) VA that resulted in the following diagnosis: AXIS I - Major Depressive Disorder (single episode); AXIS II - No diagnosis, borderline personality features.  The mental health physician stated, “She is being seen due to depression for all of her life but has really hit a low since early October when she went to see a mental health provider at Patrick AFB (no notes in record) and placed on Lexapro….She states she guesses she has had mood swings all of her life but really took notice the past couple of years.  Most recent was this morning when she was on the ship feeling happy coming on the ship, angry down in her berthing then ok eating breakfast then an overwhelming feeling of depression which brought her here to be seen.  She has intermittent feelings of wanting to hurt herself by cutting on her arm or burning her arms with a lighter to help her feel release.  Sometimes she goes to the extreme of wanting to drive her car off a bridge.  Currently she denies suicidal or homicidal ideations and would seek medical help before she would attempt suicide if the thoughts occur….She states that she has been having fits of crying spells for no reason at all and last time being out to sea she just kept crying herself to sleep at night and had trouble getting herself out of the rack.  Before the Navy she had fits of insomnia then when she first joined she slept well although with nightmares and now she has trouble getting up….She was seen by ship medical for depression in October (2005).  She admits to a suicide attempt at age 17 by taking a whole bottle of aspirin which prompted her to be seen by a social worker and a counselor.  She states she has a history of burning her arms with cigarettes for emotional release and to increase her pain tolerance since she was physically abused by her father.  She denies any hospitalizations.  There is family history of psychiatric disorders.…The patient denies illicit drug use but did use illicit drugs in high school, tried everything at least once like marijuana, crank, etc, but did use coke and heroin for a year 2000-2001 everyday….Patient described family relationship (growing up) as not being harmonious….The patient joined the military to get off the streets and get her life back in order….Psychologically patient has a history of depression with borderline traits due to her feeling of release by hurting herself and past substance abuse history.”  The physician found her fit for full duty, prescribed Lexapro, and recommended follow-up appointments with psychiatry, counseling, and stress management.  In Sep 2007, the record indicates she was seen by ship medical due to “complaints of being depressed.  Patient states she is so sad and in so much emotional pain that she wants to take 

a knife and mutilate herself to get the pain out.  She has no desire to kill herself or harm others.  She does not have a plan.  She is frustrated with her work center and feels that she is not being supported.  She was told by her LPO that she does not work hard enough and that she does not make any contribution to the division.  She is the divisional training PO (petty officer), DCPO (damage control petty officer), work-center supervisor until recently ETT.  She was fired from ETT in a public forum which caused her a great deal of embarrassment and shame.  She has a positive past history of depression which she is treated with celexa.  Patient states that until recently the medication has seemed to be therapeutic but now she feels tired all the time but cannot sleep well.  She feels sad and unmotivated.”  The Applicant was found fit for full duty and referred for follow-up with NMCP Psychiatry, and fleet and family services center counseling.

On 16 Nov 2007, after ingesting 20 Ambien tablets, the Applicant self-referred to the ship’s medical department stating, “she does not want to go to Mast.”  After emergency care was administered, she was transferred to the NMCP Psychiatric ward for evaluation.  The Applicant was diagnosed with Depressive disorder NOS (not otherwise specified) and Polysubstance Dependence in sustained full remission.  After 5 days of hospitalization, she was released to her command and recommended for administrative separation.  Based on the Medical Officer’s recommendation, the Applicant’s record and potential for further service, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer processed her for administrative separation.  When notified of administrative processing using the notification procedure on 21 Nov 2007, the Applicant elected to exercise her right to submit a written statement, but waived her rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.  The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 14 Dec 2007 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Personality Disorder.

:  (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to obtain veteran education 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.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends command legal and administrative impropriety caused overwhelming stress and led to her discharge.  The NDRB is not an investigative body, and allegations of command legal or administrative impropriety should be made to the Naval Inspector General’s Office.  Allegations notwithstanding, the Board conducted a detailed review of the Applicant’s record to determine whether her discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The records revealed that between 2005 through 2007 the Applicant received repeated medical evaluations, psychiatric treatment, and ancillary counseling related to her stress, anxiety, and depression.  After extensive review of the records, the Board could find no evidence of any type of command impropriety.  With regard to her characterization of service, per the Naval Military Personnel Manual, a Sailor may be awarded a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge if a member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweigh positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant did reveal a significant history of pre-service continuous illicit drug use to her mental health physician (marijuana, crank at least once; cocaine and heroin daily for a year, between 2000 and 2001), which qualified her enlistment under fraudulent conditions.  Therefore, based on all the available evidence within the record and with no evidence submitted on the Applicant’s behalf to rebut the presumption of government regularity in this case, the Board found the Applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge to be proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and  record entries, 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), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 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