ex- LTJG, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20160301
Characterization of Service Received:   
Narrative Reason for Discharge:   MISCONDUCT (OTHER)
Authority for Discharge:   SECNAVINST 1920.6C 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	
	Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED
	Reentry Code change to: NONE REQUESTED

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:  NONE                Active:   Year(s)     Month(s)   21  Day(s)  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Appointment:  20110107	Age:  30
Years Contracted:  Indefinite
Date of Discharge:  20141105	Highest Rank:  LTJG
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   29 Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  79
Officer’s Fitness reports:  Available

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  Pistol EX JSCM NMCAM JMUC 2 GCM 2 NAVY “E” NDSM ICM GWOTEM GWOTSM HSM OSR 3 SSDR 5 ESWS EAWS

Periods of CONF:  NONE
Other Time Lost per DD214:  NONE

Discharge Process

20120703:	NJP.  Violation of UCMJ Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer).   In that Ensign Harmon aboard the USS McCAMPBELL (DDG 85) on or about 13 June 2012, behave himself with disrespect toward Commander T_ J. D_, his superior commissioned officer by saying to him “I know what I’m doing” or words to that effect in a disrespectful tone.
	Violation of UCMJ Article 92 (Failure to obey order, regulation).  In that Ensign H_ having knowledge of a lawful order issued by Commander D_ to comply with the procedural requirements of his Article 15 hearing, did on or about 14 June 2012 fail to obey the same by refusing to comply with such procedure.
Violation of UCMJ Article 133 (Conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman).  In that Ensign H_ on or about 13 June 2012 conduct himself in a disrespectful manner in the presence of others toward his commanding officer which conduct was unbecoming an officer and gentleman.
      .
	Awarded – Reprimand:  Oral and Written (20120707)

20120713:	Applicant appealed NJP.

20121018:	Commanding Officer USS McCAMPBELL, Commander D_  Applicant’s NJP appeal.
Commander D_ endorsed Report of  and provided copy to Applicant for comment.

20121026	Applicant appealed NJP to Commander, Carrier Strike Group FIVE, RDML H_.

20130118:	Commander, Carrier Strike Group FIVE, RDML H_ denied Applicant’s NJP appeal.

20130510:	Commanding Officer USS McCAMPBELL, Commander D_ requests Detachment for Cause in case of the Applicant.

20130523:	Applicant provides a written statement on Detachment for Cause letter to Commander, Navy Personnel Command.

20130627:	 USS McCAMPBELL forwarded Report of Misconduct to Commander, Naval Personnel Command recommending Applicant  for retention.

20131125:	Commander, Carrier Strike Group FIVE, RDML Montgomery endorses Detachment for Cause and request to show cause for retention.

20140218:	Commander, Navy Personnel Command approves Detachment for Cause.

20140310:	Commander, Naval Personnel Command, notified Applicant of Administrative Separation Processing.

20140322:	Applicant submitted 

20140806:	Commander, Naval Personnel Command, recommended to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) that the Applicant’s resignation request be disapproved and that he be administratively separated with characterization of service as Under Honorable Conditions (General).

20140826:	Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) approved Applicant’s discharge by reason of misconduct, with characterization of service as Under Honorable Conditions (General).

20141105:	Applicant discharged this date.
			
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 20041116 UNTIL 20110106”

	Block 25, Separation Authority, should read:  “SECNAVINST 1920.6C”
	
The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps or Commander, Navy Personnel Command that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	
	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.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 15 December 2005 until Present, establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  The Applicant contends the characterization of his discharge was harsh and unjust.  
2.  The Applicant contends that his in-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.
3.  The Applicant suggests that a mental health disorder may have been a contributing factor to his misconduct.

discussion

Date:  20161013		Location:  WASHINGTON D.C.	Representation:  

The Naval Discharge Review Board (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 Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met.  

As a result of the Applicant’s claim that a mental health condition impacted their discharge, and in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (e)(2), and Memorandum, The Secretary of Defense, to Secretaries of the Military Departments, subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (3 Sep. 2014), the NDRB included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with special training on mental health disorders.  

The Applicant’s service record documents completion of a deployment to Iraq from October 2008 to April 2009 in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.

The Applicant's record of service included:

  for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): 
	  -	Article 89 (Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer)	
	-	Article 92 (Failure to obey order, regulation)	
 	 -	Article 133 (Conduct unbecoming officer)	

Issue 1:  The Applicant contends the characterization of his discharge was harsh and unjust.  The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis.  If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order.  Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service.  An Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.  The Applicant’s violation of Articles 89, 92, and 133 highlight those negative aspects.  Violation of these articles would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial for the same or closely related offense.  The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge.  The NDRB found that the characterization and narrative of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances.

:  The Applicant contends that his in-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.  The NDRB 
reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis.  If such a review reveals an 
impropriety or inequity, relief is in order.  Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent 
with standards of discipline of  the Naval Service.  In this case, the Applicant’s misconduct and shortcomings in his duties as an officer outweighs the positive aspects of service.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service was warranted.  

Issue 3:  The Applicant contends that a mental health disorder contributed to his misconduct.  Though the Applicant may feel 
that his mental health was an underlying cause to his misconduct, the record does not reflect nor has the Applicant produced 
any evidence that substantiates a diagnosis or treatment for a mental health disorder during the period of his enlistment.  The 
Applicant did provide medical documents from the Veterans Administration that detailed a diagnosis of anxiety and sleep 
apnea in March 2015.  However, the evidence of record did not show that the mental condition was present at the time of the 
misconduct or if so, was a sufficient mitigating factor to excuse the Applicant’s conduct or accountability concerning his 
actions.  After an exhaustive review, the NDRB determined that mental health did not mitigate the Applicant’s misconduct.  

decision

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall  UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL), the narrative reason for separation shall  MISCONDUCT (OTHER) with a corresponding separation code of BKM.  The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of the 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/.  More information is available at http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/CORB/pages/ndrb/default.aspx.

Additional Reviews: After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance or telephonic 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, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code.  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-Traumatic Stress Disorder and/or Traumatic Brain Injury: For all claims involving PTSD and/or TBI, the NDRB’s review implemented the guidance set forth in the SECDEF Memorandum of 3 September 2014 (Supplemental guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).  In accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1) & d(2), the NDRB included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution and a final decision.

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.

Military Sexual Trauma: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) uses the term "military sexual trauma" (MST) to refer to experiences of sexual assault or repeated, threatening sexual harassment experienced while on federal active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty training.  To get confidential one-on-one help please contact the MST Coordinator at your nearest VA Medical Center or Call Safe Helpline at 1-877-995-5247 or visit www.mentalhealth.va.gov/msthome.asp.

Reporting Military Sexual Trauma: To report a military sexual trauma, you can make an anonymous report to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) by Text or Online.  The NCIS Tip Line provides service members, veterans and civilians a safe, discreet and ANONYMOUS option to report criminal and force protection threats within the USN and USMC without concerns of retaliation.  To report a crime by Text: Text  274637 (CRIMES); Type “NCIS” at the top of the message; and include as much detail as possible to ensure your tip can effectively be investigated.  To send your ANONYMOUS Tip via the online, go to https://www.tipsubmit.com/webtipsNAV.aspx?AgencyID=840.

Suicide Prevention: Veterans in emotional crisis or their loved ones can call the free and confidential Veterans Crisis Line at 1-800-273-8255 (then press 1); or chat online at http://www.veteranscrisisline.net, or send a text message to 838255 to connect with a caring, qualified Veteran Affairs Responder who can deal with any immediate crisis.