, ex- PFC, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20191113
Characterization of Service Received:    
Narrative Reason for Discharge:    DISABILITY TEMPORARY (ENHANCED)
Authority for Discharge:    MARCORSEPMAN 8501 

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

Summary of Service

Prior Creditable Service:
Inactive:	 	             	Active:	 20100203 – 20131105 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20131106	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20150629	Highest Rank/Rate:  Cpl
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  23  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  51

Evaluation Marks (# of occasions):  Performance/Proficiency: 3.4 (NFIR)   Behavior/Conduct: 3.4 (NFIR)   
Fitness Reports: 

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  GCM NDSM GWOTSM NMCOSR (2) CoC (Individual Award) LoA (5)  

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

NJP:    SPCM:    CIVIL ARREST:    CC:    Counseling Warning:  

SCM:  

- 20150330:	Article 81 (Conspiracy) 
	Article 86 (Absence without leave, etc.)
	Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, manufacture or introduction of controlled substance)
	Sentence:  
	CA: The sentence is approved, as adjudged and will be executed. 

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20141218:	For non-compliance with the Continuing Care Group (CCG) and the aftercare plan recommended by the SACC, MCAS New River.     

- 20141218:	For failure to go to appointed place of duty on multiple occasions (Article 86, UCMJ).  

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 20100203 UNTIL 20131105”
	
The NDRB will recommend to Commander, Navy Personnel Command or Commandant of the Marine Corps 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:	
 
Types of Witnesses Who Testified

	Expert:  			Character:    

	Witness E-1:			Witness C-1:	
	Witness E-2:			Witness C-2:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual P1900.16F Ch2 of 6 June 2007, Para 8501.

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 that as a result of enduring multiple Military Sexual Traumas (MST), she developed chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and this condition was a mitigating factor in her misconduct.
2.	The Applicant contends her discharge is inequitable as her Mental Health providers unfairly overlooked her classic symptoms of PTSD prior to misconduct and as a result, this negatively impacted her ability to serve. 
3.	The Applicant contends her in-service and post-service achievements warrant consideration for an upgrade.

Discussion

Date:  20200709		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 PTSD/TBI was based in whole or in part on sexual trauma, intimate partner violence, or spousal abuse, the NDRB obtained a review by a psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker with training on mental health issues associated with PTSD/TBI or other trauma.  Additionally, and pursuant to § 1553, the NDRB reviewed the case with liberal consideration that a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, or Military Sexual Trauma potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in the discharge of a lesser characterization.  A review of the record revealed that the Applicant did not deploy in support of a contingency operation, and so this case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with § 1553.

The Applicant's record of service included:

Two Retention Warning Counselings

    for  of the UCMJ:  
Article 81 (Conspiracy) 
Article 86 (Absence without leave, etc.)
Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, manufacture or introduction of controlled substance)

Based on the Applicant’s physical disability, the Secretary of the Navy authorized a physical disability retirement. 

Issues 1-3: The Applicant contends that as a result of enduring multiple Military Sexual Traumas (MST), she developed chronic Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and this condition was a mitigating factor in her misconduct.  Further, the Applicant contends her discharge is inequitable as her Mental Health providers unfairly overlooked her classic symptoms of PTSD prior to misconduct and as a result, this negatively impacted her ability to serve.  Lastly, the Applicant contends her in-service and post-service achievements warrant 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.  

Regarding the standards for determining characterization of service, an Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for Naval personnel.  A General (Under Honorable Conditions) 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.  

In this case, the Board found the Applicant’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel.  In making its determination, the Board considered that the Applicant stated that she was a victim of three sexual assaults during her first enlistment.  The dates of these sexual assaults were identified as June or July 2010; later in 2010, and then 2011.  For these sexual assaults, the Applicant filed two unrestricted reports to a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator and one sexual assault went unreported.  In the two unrestricted report filings, both of the perpetrators were subject to and found guilty at Special Court Martial.  Evidence of these courts-martials were contained in the petition and the NDRB found considerable evidence in her medical and service records to support the sexual assaults.  In 2012, during her first enlistment, the Applicant sought out Mental Health for evaluation and treatment for Depression and Anxiety.  The NDRB found her Mental Health evaluation and treatment to be routine from 2012, through her second enlistment, and to the point of retirement in 2015.  In psychological exams she reported thinking about the sexual assaults a few times a week while experiencing flashbacks, irritability, and difficulty sleeping.  The Applicant also reported other instances of sexual harassment during her career.  In October 2014, the Applicant was first evaluated and treated for PTSD.  Given the timing of this PTSD diagnosis, the Applicant asserted that her PTSD related symptomology had been largely ignored in the past.  Chief complaints for this evaluation and those that immediately preceded this evaluation noted her flashbacks to her MSTs, suicidal thoughts, depression, alcohol use, and a failure to cope and adjust.  The Applicant further indicates this error by her medical providers impacted her ability to serve and provides mitigation from her misconduct.  In 2015, a Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) Board found diagnoses of PTSD Chronic, Bipolar Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder Severe, and Polysubstance Abuse.  In April 2015, the Secretary of the Navy approved her transfer to the TDRL and her service was characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions).  The Applicant contends her resulting characterization of service was not given due consideration to her PTSD diagnosis, the severity of her symptoms, or the difficulties in behavior that is associated with those who have PTSD and are a repeated sexual assault survivor.

In a personal statement, since her disability retirement, the Applicant stated that she is dedicated to her recovery and is actively being treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  The VA granted her service connection for PTSD at 70% and she has a combined rating of 90% that includes other medical conditions.  She is married, maintains her sobriety, and is a dedicated church parishioner who has volunteered a considerable amount of time to overseas church missions.  Along with her personal statement, the Applicant provided excerpts of her service record, in-service and post-service medical records, and three character statements.  The character statements are all from various church leadership and describe her active role in the congregation and acts of volunteerism.

In the evidence of record, the NDRB found that the period of service that is under review is one year and seven months.  The Applicant has a previous period of Honorable service totaling three years and eight months.  As previously indicated, the Applicant was the victim of at three MSTs during her first period of service and shortly thereafter, she began receiving Mental Health treatment for Depression and Anxiety diagnoses.  Following her reenlistment, the Applicant continued to be treated routinely for her Mental Health and per her TDRL Board, she engaged in high risk behaviors and activities that included going to clubs, sexual promiscuity, alcohol abuse, and abuse of Cocaine and Marijuana.  In December 2014, the Applicant was provided two Retention Warning Counselings which cited a non-compliance with her continuing care and a failure to go to her appointed place of duty on multiple occasions.  These Article 86 related offenses included a failure to appear at remedial physical training and various medical appointments.  In March 2015, the Applicant was subject to and found guilty at SCM for violation of Articles 81, 86, and 112a.  Specific circumstances of these offenses involved conspiring with another LCpl to break that LCpl’s restriction; failure to go to appointed place of duty on one day; and wrongfully using cocaine on or about 8 and 11 December 2014.  The NDRB noted that the Applicant attained below average proficiency and conduct markings for this period of service and her record indicates she completed an overseas tour of duty and was awarded numerous Letters of Appreciation and Commendation.

In determining discharge characterization of service, the Applicant’s conduct forms the primary basis for consideration.  The Applicant’s in-service conduct included one Summary Court-Martial that included an Article 112a violation and this was a willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract honorably.  However, the Applicant contends that as a result of enduring mulitiple MST, her PTSD was a mitigating factor in her misconduct and this condition was largely ignored by her Mental Health providers.  The Applicant’s official record of multiple Mental Health diagnoses that are wholly attributed to MST, coupled with additional post-service documentation provided by the Applicant, support the Applicant’s contention that her PTSD was a mitigating factor associated with the in-service misconduct.  Moreover, the Board opined that her ability to serve was clearly diminished following her MSTs; her diminished ability to serve was plainly articulated in her early Mental Health evaluations; and from the perspective the Applicant was eventually placed in a disability status, the Applicant may have received more comprehensive counseling/treatment to better equip her to avoid her misconduct had she been placed in a Wounded Warrior Battalion, rather than reenlistment and transfer to a supporting establishment command.  This Wounded Warrior Battalion transition would have enabled a focused command effort to get her the treatment that she required and likely would have expedited the Physical and Medical Evaluation Board process.  In this case, a disability retirement was approved some four years after her MSTs and three years after her debilitating Mental Health onset.  Given the unique circumstances of this individual case, coupled with the documented Mental Health Diagnoses, and the Applicant’s continued post-service recovery, the Board determined her petition warranted additional consideration in the determination of overall characterization of service.  While granting liberal consideration, the Board found that the awarded characterization of service was inequitable and that relief in the form of an upgrade in the characterization of service to Honorable is warranted.

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    Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall  HONORABLE, the narrative reason for separation shall  DISABILITY TEMP (ENHANCED) with a corresponding separation code of SEK1, and the reentry code shall  RE-3P.  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: 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.