ex-ABHAA, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20220904
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:  REQUESTED, BUT NOT SPECIFIED
Reentry Code change to:  REQUESTED, BUT NOT SPECIFIED

Summary of Service

Prior Creditable Service:
Inactive:   	            	Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20070814	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20110620	Highest Rank/Rate:  ABHAN
Length of Service:  03  Year(s)  10  Month(s)  07  Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  68
Deployment/Operation:  

Evaluation Marks (# of occasions):  Performance/Proficiency:  3.0 (1)   Behavior/Conduct:  3.0 (1)   OTA:  3.00 
Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  GCM NDSM GWOTSM

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

SCM:    SPCM:    CIVIL ARREST:    CC:    Retention Warning Counseling:  NONE

NJP:  1

- 20110512:	Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, manufacture or introduction of controlled substance) 
	Awarded: RIR
	Suspended:  NONE

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

	    “ABHAA”
	    “E2”

The NDRB will recommend to 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:	

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, (NAVPERS 15560D), Change 32, effective 07 September 2010 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 contends she was never provided an opportunity to decline NJP and take an administrative separation (ADSEP) from the navy.
2.	The Applicant contends post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and military sexual trauma (MST) were mitigating factors in her misconduct.
Discussion

Date:  20230503		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 MST 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:

  for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): 
Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, manufacture or introduction of controlled substance) 

:  The Applicant contends she was never provided an opportunity to decline NJP and take an ADSEP from the Navy.

The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs.  The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support her issue.  There is insufficient evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention her command denied her due process rights.  The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Documentation in the Applicant’s service record noted she received NJP on 12 May 2011 for violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ.  Based on this documentation, the Applicant was informed of her right to decline NJP for court-martial, was afforded an opportunity to consult with qualified counsel, and voluntarily accepted NJP.  It was her option to refuse NJP and demand trial by court-martial, however, this likely would have resulted in a more serious sentence and the Applicant did not exercise this right.  Based on the Applicant’s statement in her DD Form 293, the Board found it important to point out that it was not an option for the Applicant to decline NJP and simply walk away from any repercussions after testing positive for marijuana.  Furthermore, the Applicant was ADSEP’d from the Navy.  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 ADSEP 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.  The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge.  Post NJP, an ADSEP processing notice in the Applicant’s record demonstrated she was notified of ADSEP on 31 May 2011 for misconduct – drug abuse.  This document clearly indicated the Applicant waived her right to consult with qualified counsel, exercise her right to an ADSEP board, and to make a statement.  She was subsequently ADSEP’d from the Navy on 20 June 2011.  The Board found no impropriety in the Applicant’s NJP process or ADSEP proceedings.  Relief denied on this issue.

:  The Applicant contends PTSD and MST were mitigating factors in her misconduct.

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 existed during military service; c) the condition/experience mitigated the underlying basis/misconduct for the discharge; and d) the condition/experience outweighed the Applicant’s assigned Discharge Characterization.  

MEDICAL BOARD MEMBER OPINION
1.	Does the available record reasonably support a DSM mental/ behavioral health condition, PTSD, TBI, or Sexual Trauma/Abuse/IPV existed at the time of the Applicant’s military service?
	Yes – Postpartum Depression and, at least, undiagnosed Adjustment Disorder retrospectively suggestive of PST/MST (USN); PTSD/MST (VA)	
2.	A.	Were these conditions present at time of misconduct?	Yes (Postpartum Depression and, at least, undiagnosed Adjustment Disorder retrospectively suggestive of PTSD/MST (USN); PTSD/MST (VA))	
	B.	Were these conditions mitigating for the misconduct?	Yes	
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:	PRIOR TO ENLISTMENT:

21 Oct 1989:  DOB

“Born in US, moved to Jamaica with parents and brother when 1 year old, then moved back to US when 12. At that time her mother "just up and left the family" and her father raised her and her brother alone until her mother returned 3 years later - veteran reported playing competitive soccer at a very high level in high school and offered scholarships to college; however, she wanted to join the military. She reported this caused a rift in her relationship with her father as he wanted her to go to school and continue with soccer.”

14 Aug 2007—ENLISTMENT: @ Age 17 PC (Parental Consent)

05 Nov 2007—Concerns About Unsafe Sexual Practices.

May 2008—Marriage?

15 Oct 2008—1st Child born—CAESARIAN #1…

01 Oct 2009—2nd Child born—CAESARIAN, Elective #2.

Jul 2010—Alleged Victim of Rape (MST) by perpetrator serving in her Command—“Doesn’t appear she disclosed this to anyone – not even sure about her husband.  Says her husband left her two months after her second child was born, but it was really closer to 2 years.”

15 Feb 2011—Clinic  visits:

UTERINE SCAR FROM PREVIOUS CESAREAN DELIVERY POST PARTUM DEPRESSION – MODERATE

Mar 2011—Alleged date husband leaves her for 

22 Apr 2011—DEPRESSIVE TYPE PSYCHOSIS (MDD)

Assessment:  Upon arrival to clinic, pt was evaluated and was determined that she needs to have further evaluation by psych.  Pt presented with flat affect with no eye contact.  Appears to be appropriately dressed.  Speech pattern slow; however, seems to become very fidgety when spoke to.

Recommendation:  Psych Evaluation. Pt still refuses to go voluntarily to PHN-ED.  CDO and immediate supervisors made aware and plan now is to transport patient to PNH-ED via BLS transport-called.  ETA approximately 2 hours.  For patient safety, CDO Nelson will remain at bedside with patient.

“Assessment:  Upon arrival to clinic, pt was evaluated by Ms. X and was determined that she needs to have further evaluation by psych.  Pt presented with flat affect with no eye contact.  Appears to be appropriately dressed.  Speech pattern slow; however, seems to become very fidgety when spoke to.

Recommendation:  Psych Evaluation.  Pt still refuses to go voluntarily to PHN-ED.  CDO and immediate supervisors made aware and plan now is to transport patient to PNH-ED via BLS transport-called.  ETA approximately 2 hours.  For patient safety, CDO X will remain at bedside with patient.”

22 Apr 2011—Note:
“She didn't know what to do at that point.  She called the quarter deck and her CDO came and picked her up.  States that they wanted her to go to the ER but she refused. She states that she feels hopeless.  She doesn't trust anyone and that if she got hit by a car she would be okay with it.  She states that she is tired and just wants to sleep.  States that she wouldn't hurt her kids, she just goes through the motions with them and does what she has to do.  She is very tearful and would not make any eye contact. When discussing possible pysh consult, she gets a little irritated and rubs her headdress.  She said she just doesn't care anymore.

History of present illness…The Patient is a 21 year old female.  She reported: Symptoms not controlled on current medication pt was rxed wellbutrin for postpartum depression by her OB.  Feeling tired or poorly.  Feeling restless, hypersensitivity, depression as a chronic condition, difficulty falling asleep, apathy, no desire to continue living pt states that she doesn't care anymore.  She is so tired, absence of motivation, hallucinations she said when she was walking and she felt like she was in a room full of people.  Hearing voices.  She felt like someone was chasing her.  She felt at that time she called the CDO, feeling emotionally detached I’m just going through the motions, and interpersonal relationship problems…Past medical/surgical history.

Diagnosis History:  Postpartum depression…Personal history: Husband left her and is cheating on her.  She has 3 small children and youngest child is 3 months old.  Getting out of the military soon Interpersonal problems with husband and recent emotional stress.”

Additional History:

“-Used MJ in Mar 2011; tested + in Apr.
-Goes on to questions the ADSEP and NJP.  Says she was never given an opportunity to refuse NJP – think she’s confused about this and CM, not just being able to walk away from punishment altogether.  Says she was given an opportunity to be ADSEP – was in fact ADSEP’d.”

POST SEPARATION:

“-Post-service she uses MJ, cocaine, & alcohol.
-Received treatment from wounded warrior project in 2013.”

30 Sep 2022—VA  ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION DATA, SCREEN <11>
9411-POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER(50% SC)
EFFECTIVE DATE: - AUG 4, 2022
6260-TINNITUS(10% SC) – EFFECTIVE DATE: -OCT 22, 2022-
6100-IMPAIRED HEARING(0% SC) –    “

06 Dec 2022—VA BEHAVIORAL EALTH CONSULT:
“Reported Concerns/Symptoms: trauma response sxs following 2010 MST.

Duration: v 4- 5 months Triggers: starting VA process given she was OTH discharge following MST and unable to access VA MH resources at that time.

Frequency/Intensity of physical sensations: daily; exacerbated Behaviors/Habits: ‘compartmentalizing’ Thoughts: ‘nothing is truly safe…if I am not paying attention something bad will happen’…”

09 Dec 2022—VA PSYCHOLOGIST/PTSD PROGRAM MANAGER NOTE:
“…Reported Concerns/Symptoms: trauma response sxs following 2010 MST

Duration:  4- 5 months
Triggers:  starting VA process given she was OTH discharge following MST and unable to access VA MH resources at that time.

Frequency/Intensity of physical sensations: daily; exacerbated Behaviors/Habits: ‘compartmentalizing’  Thoughts: ‘nothing is truly safe…’if I am not paying attention something bad will happen…’

-Born in US, moved to with parents and brother when 1 year old, then moved back to US when 12. At that time her mother ‘just up and left the family’ and her father raised her and her brother alone until her mother returned 3 years later - veteran reported playing competitive soccer at a very high level in high school and offered scholarships to college; however, she wanted to join the military. She reported this caused a rift in her relationship with her father as he wanted her to go to school and continue with soccer. They remain distant.

-Veteran served in the Navy from 2007-2011. She reported she was sexually assaulted by an officer in her command.  She did not report at the time, but did unofficially tell someone what happened.  Following that she was subjected to frequent drug screens which she felt were targeted at her.  She reported she began to "spiral down" after the assault, using marijuana to self medicate, one time was found wondering barefoot down an unfamiliar road and hospitalized. She was eventually discharged as other than honorable due to positive UDS.

-After discharge from the military her husband left her and her 3 young children. She went through a period of homelessness and her drug use escalated and began using cocaine. She acknowledged history of cutting on her arms as means of dealing with emotional pain. She had one episode of cutting her wrist with intention of dying, and had to have medical attention. This was sometime between 201--2014, she is uncertain of the date.

-Veteran reported her mother became very supportive of her at that time and helped her "get back on my feet." Veteran now lives in her own apartment with her 3 children, ages 12, 13, and 14. She has been sober for 7 years. She is self-employed making beauty products and selling them online, and home-schools her children”

29 Mar 2023—VA PHARMACOTHERAPY NOTE:
“Patient was last seen in clinic by Dr. X on 2/28/2023 when diphenhydramine was decreased to 25mgqAM + 50mg at bedtime, and quetiapine, hydroxyzine, and propranolol were continued as prescribed… Patient reports feeling ‘okay.’ Veteran states that she spoke with Dr…regarding her quetiapine and diphenhydramine. Veteran states that she is no longer taking these medications and prefers to just continue with the trazodone at this time…: Chronic PTSD”

COMMENT:  Against the background of a somewhat disruptive family situation marked by a US birth and rearing split between a first year in USA and the next 12 years in Jamaica, then returning to the USA at age 12, only to face her mother’s decision to “up and [leave]” her family for a 3-year period.  Apparently blessed with, a gifted natural competitive talent for soccer (offered athletic scholarships), she felt more drawn to a military career, (against her father’s will) insisting on the Navy, only to allegedly having been sexually assaulted by an officer in her command after nearly 3 years of Service, after which she reportedly only shared her MST with one person but, apparently did not share it with any of her healthcare providers, who diagnosed her with POST PARTUM DEPRESSION.  In any event, she “spiraled down,” seeking relief in Marijuana use, leading to her OTH discharge and later diagnosis of PTSD and MST by the VA with whom she shared more details and who established Service Connection with a disability rating of 50% about a decade later in 2022.  Accordingly, a nexus would appear to exist between her Misconduct and the mental health conditions noted above.	

In determining discharge characterization of service, the Applicant’s conduct forms the primary basis for consideration.  The Applicant’s in-service conduct included one NJP for violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ; this was a failure to meet the requirements of her contract honorably.  However, the Applicant contends MST and PTSD were mitigating factors in her misconduct.  Outside of her statement regarding MST, the Board found no in-service documentation regarding an alleged sexual assault by someone from her unit.  However, the Applicant’s official military service record diagnosis of PTSD, coupled with additional post-service documentation provided by the Applicant, support the Applicant’s contention that PTSD was a mitigating factor associated with her in-service misconduct.  Here, military medical documentation noted post-partum depression and an adjustment disorder were present in-service and suggested to the Board that a nexus could be drawn between her marijuana use and her existing medical conditions.  Based on these details, the Board determined the unique circumstances of this individual case, coupled with the opinion of the Board’s Psychiatrist, warranted additional consideration in the determination of overall characterization of her service.

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.  An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service.

In this case, the Applicant’s service was 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 Board considered the Applicant’s overall capacity to serve; her entire military performance and conduct; her mental health diagnosis; the nexus between her drug use and her mental/emotional stability; and the severity of her conduct in relation to her discharge characterization.  The Applicant served 3 years, 10 months, and 7 days of a 4 year, 12 month extension enlistment, maintained an overall trait average of 3.00, and was awarded a Good Conduct Medal.  Outside of her NJP for Article 112a, the Board found insufficient evidence of any other negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty to outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s service record.  While the Board also considered her misconduct a significant negative aspect within her military career, it did not rise to constitute a significant departure of military conduct in the context of his entire time in-service.  Of note, the Board considered this case in accordance with the Kurta Memorandum, but found insufficient evidence to grant full relief.  Consequently, the Board discerned no impropriety in the discharge action but did discern an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service.  By unanimous decision, the Board voted to upgrade the Applicant’s discharge.  Partial relief granted.

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  UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL), the narrative reason for separation shall  SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY with a corresponding separation code of JFF, 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).  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.