ex- SN, CURRENT DISCHARGE AND APPLICANT'S REQUEST Application Received: 20220627 Characterization of Service Received: NARRATIVE REASON FOR DISCHARGE: MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE) AUTHORITY FOR DISCHARGE: MILPERSMAN 1910-146 [DRUG ABUSE] 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: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20200128 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 20220419 Highest Rank/Rate: STG3 Length of Service: 02 Year(s) 02 Month(s) 22 Day(s) Education Level: 12 AFQT: 75 Deployment/Operation: Evaluation Marks (# of occasions): Performance/Proficiency: 3.5 (2) Behavior/Conduct: 4.0 (2) OTA: 3.66 Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Pistol NDSM GWOTSM Periods of UA: NONE Periods of CONF: NONE Other Time Lost per DD214: NONE SPCM: NONE SCM: CIVIL ARREST: CC: NJP: NONE Retention Warning Counseling: NONE 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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, effective 9 October 2019 until Present, Article 1910-146, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE. B. Secretary of the Navy Manual 5420.1 of 29 September 2020 (Standards for the execution of the Naval Discharge Review Board). DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant's Issues 1. The Applicant seeks an upgrade because his drug use is mitigated by his depression and neck pain. Discussion Date: 20230131 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 of a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, or Military Sexual Trauma, and in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1553, the NDRB included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist. 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 no retention warning counseling and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. : The Applicant seeks an upgrade because his drug use is mitigated by his depression and neck pain. 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. Because the Applicant claimed mental health was a factor in their discharge, the Board reviewed the Applicant's case in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1553, and pursuant to the Kurta Memo and other applicable regulations and guidance, including the Wilkie Memo. Under the Kurta Memo, "[m]ental health conditions, including PTSD; sexual assault; and sexual harassment inherently affect one's behaviors and choices causing veterans to think and behave differently than might otherwise be expected." Although, "[l]iberal consideration does not mandate an upgrade, [r]elief may be appropriate ... for minor misconduct commonly associated with mental health conditions ... and some significant misconduct sufficiently justified or outweighed by the facts and circumstances." Additionally, "substance seeking behavior and efforts to self-medicate symptoms of a mental health condition may warrant consideration." However, "[p]remeditated misconduct is not generally excused by mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; or by a sexual assault or sexual harassment experience." Therefore, "Review Boards will exercise caution in assessing the causal relationship between asserted conditions or experiences and premeditated misconduct." See USD (P&R) Memo, "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment" 25 August 2017 ("Kurta Memo"). The review of discharges pursuant to the Kurta Memo and its other applicable regulations/guidance generally involves four questions: a) Did the veteran have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge; b) Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service; c) Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge; and d) Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? In this case, the Board found that: a) the Applicant did have a condition/experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge; b) the condition did not exist during military service; c) the condition/experience did not mitigate the underlying basis/misconduct for the discharge; and d) the condition/experience did not outweigh did not outweigh the Applicant's assigned Discharge Characterization. MEDICAL BOARD MEMBER OPINION (if Applicable) 1. Does the available record reasonably support PTSD (or other boarded mental health condition) existed at the time of applicant's military service? Yes - Other Specified Trauma and Stress Related Disorder 2. Were these conditions present at time of misconduct? Unknown - timeline of misconduct unclear Were these conditions mitigating for the misconduct? No (see below) 3. Were all required mental health and/or medical evaluations conducted in accordance with regulations, prior to the administrative separation of the applicant? Yes 4. Medical board member comments: Reviewed the Applicant's treatment and service records The Applicant contends mental health conditions mitigate the misconduct. I was unable to find significant evidence of significant mental health diagnoses or treatment in the Applicant's military treatment records. Additionally, I was unable to find the exact circumstances of the Applicant's misconduct and discharge. Without further information, I am unable to provide a nexus with the misconduct. In this case, the Applicant seeks an upgrade because he was using drugs as a formed of self-medication for neck pain, depression, and nightmares. The Applicant claims that his stepfather died and when he returned from the funeral he was suicidal. He states that he attempted to commit suicide but he only told his friends about the attempt and not a medical provider. The Applicant states that he began having nightmares about the funeral home upon his return to the ship. He contends that prior to getting caught using drugs, his stepfather's mom died, and her death led him to start using drugs. Certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Naval Service to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade or time in service. 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. However, here, the command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Further, when reviewing discharges, the Board considers the standards for determining characterization of service where 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. Further, an honorable discharge characterization does not require flawless military service; many veterans are separated with an honorable characterization despite some relatively minor or infrequent misconduct. 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 quality of the member's service was honest and faithful but drug use is a significant negative aspects of the Applicant's conduct or performance of duty and it outweighed the positive aspects of the member's service record. More specifically, the Applicant contends his mother's death was a mitigating factor in his conscious decision to violate the widely broadcast zero tolerance drug policy. However, even though the Applicant may feel that his mental health was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the NDRB found insufficient evidence a mental health diagnosis existed while the Applicant was on active duty. Additionally, and in arguendo, applying liberal consideration that a mental health condition existed in service, the Board found insufficient evidence there was a nexus to the Applicant's drug use and non-documented mental health symptoms. Further, and in arguendo, even if the Board held the Applicant's mental health condition existed in service, and thus liberally considered that the mental health condition may excuse or mitigate the discharge, the Board would not find the Applicant's mental health condition rose to such an incapacitating level as to exonerate him of all misconduct. In other words, the Applicant's mental health/symptomology did not sufficiently mitigate (and certainly not exonerate) his actions for the Board to find that the Applicant's performance and conduct meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for Naval personnel where he made a conscious decision to violate the well-known zero-tolerance drug policy. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the all-volunteer Armed Forces is challenging but reflects a commitment to our Nation; thus, service members deserve to be recognized upon completion of their service. One of the ways in which our service members are recognized is through the determination of their characterization of service. Most servicemembers, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges. In fairness to those Marines and Sailors who served honorably, Commanders and Separation Authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving servicemembers receive no higher characterization than is due. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant's discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. 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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS), the narrative reason for separation shall MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE) with a corresponding separation code of JKK, and the reentry code shall RE-4. 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 Additional NDRB Reviews: After receiving a NDRB Document Review, an Applicant remains eligible for a Personal Appearance/Telephonic Hearing if the application is received by the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant's date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claim(s) related to their discharge as well as evidence of post-service accomplishments. Representation at a personal appearance hearing by an Attorney (or Advocate) 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. However, if you have been discharged for more than 15 years, already had a personal appearance hearing, or otherwise exhausted your opportunity to be heard by 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. Appeal Procedures on NDRB Decision: If you contest the NDRB's decision in your case AND you already contested the NDRB's previous decision at a Personal Appearance Hearing or otherwise exhausted your opportunity before the NDRB (or it has been more than 15 years since your discharge), 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. The BCNR is the highest level of administrative review within the Department of the Navy/Marine Corps to correct errors or injustices to member's records. Complaint Procedures on Format: If you believe the decision in your case is ambiguous, 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 (JSRA), OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the DoD Instruction 1332.28 before submitting such a complaint. This complaint procedure does not permit a challenge on the merits of the NDRB's decision; the JSRA is designed solely to ensure that the NDRB decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. Therefore, if you are contesting the merits of the NDRB's decision and already had a NDRB personal appearance hearing or otherwise exhausted your opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may appeal/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 [VA] Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of facilitating access to VA benefits. Regulations limit the NDRB's review solely to a determination of the propriety, equity, and clemency of a discharge. Consequently, the Applicant should petition the VA, which determines eligibility for post-service benefits. The VA conducts its own determination of eligibility based on service records and input from an Applicant upon their request. (See www.va.gov/discharge-upgrade-instructions [HYPERLINK: http://www.va.gov/discharge-upgrade-instructions]). Therefore, if the NDRB grants a change to a discharge, the NDRB will notify the Commander, Navy Personnel Command or Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate; however, it is the Applicant's responsibility to ensure these changes are incorporated into the record by the respective Service Headquarters. Further, it is the Applicant's sole responsibility to submit these changes to the VA for a determination of eligibility for VA Benefits. Finally, the Applicant should refer to the Veterans Administration website (https://www.va.gov/) for information regarding VA benefits and healthcare. Additionally, Veterans in acute suicidal crisis can go to any VA or non-VA health care facility for emergency health care at no cost - including inpatient or crisis residential care for up to 30 days and outpatient care for up to 90 days. Veterans do not need to be enrolled in the VA system to use this benefit. In order to find the nearest VA office to receive assistance with determining VA eligibility/access, the Applicant should refer to https://www.va.gov/find-locations. 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 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. If the Applicant's claim of 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. 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 that 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. Additionally, Veterans in acute suicidal crisis can go to any VA or non-VA health care facility for emergency health care at no cost; you can use this benefit regardless of your discharge status, or enrollment in VA health care. In order to find the nearest VA office to receive assistance, see Find your nearest VA medical center [HYPERLINK: https://www.va.gov/find-locations/?facilityType=health].