ex- GySgt, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20230228
Characterization of Service Received:   
Narrative Reason for Discharge:   MISCONDUCT
Authority for Discharge:   MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6 [COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE] 

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

Summary of Service

Prior Creditable Service:
Inactive:	ARNGUS 19911220 – 19931101 UNC             	Active:	 19940511 - 19980219  
				 19980220 - 20021101  
				 20021031 - 20051228  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20051229	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20080530	Highest Rank/Rate:  GySgt
Length of Service:  02  Year(s)  05  Month(s)  01  Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  45
Deployment/Operation: 

Evaluation Marks (# of occasions):  Proficiency: 4.5 (NFIR)   Conduct: 4.5 (NFIR)
Fitness Reports: 

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  Pistol  GCM(x4) NMCAM(x4) JSAM(x2) ICM(x2) SSDR(x3) GWOTSM GWOTEM MCRR NDSM(x2) MUC LoA(x3) MM(x5) CoA 

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

SCM:    SPCM:    CIVIL ARREST:   CC:    NJP:  NONE

Retention Warning Counseling:  4

- 20071106:	For unprofessional and inappropriate conduct.

- 20071106:	For unprofessional and inappropriate conduct. 

- 20071106:	For unprofessional conduct. 

- 20071106:	For unprofessional, inappropriate and disorderly conduct. 

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

	    “1994 05 11”
    “14 00 20”
Block 12e, Total Prior Inactive Service, should read:  “01 10 12”
	    “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 940511 UNTIL 051228”
    “Member participated in Operation IRAQI FREEDOM from 20040920 to 20050310, and from 20050827 to 20060312.”

The NDRB will recommend to 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.  Paragraph 6210.6, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 6 June 2007 until 25 November 2013.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Manual 5420.1 of 29 September 2020 (Standards for the execution of the Naval Discharge Review Board).

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 134.  

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	The Applicant contends he was innocent of the alleged misconduct and that an upgraded is warranted as a matter of equity.
2.	The Applicant claimed in his petition that post-traumatic stress disorder and mental health mitigated the reason for discharge, but counsel acknowledged during the hearing that this was a clerical oversight, and it should not have been included as a reason for mitigation, as the Applicant contends there was no misconduct.
Discussion

Date:  20231106		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.  The Applicant’s service record documents completion of two deployments from September 2004 to March 2005 and from August 2005 to March 2006 in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM.  Pursuant to § 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution.

The Applicant's record of service included:

:  The Applicant contends he was innocent of the alleged misconduct and that an upgraded is warranted as a matter of equity.  The Applicant claimed in his petition that post-traumatic stress disorder and mental health mitigated the reason for discharge, but counsel acknowledged during the hearing that this was a clerical oversight, and it should not have been included as a reason for mitigation, as the Applicant contends there was no 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 might have mitigated the underlying basis/misconduct for the discharge; and d) the condition/experience did not outweigh 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, :  ADJUSTMENT DISORDER, MAJOR DEPRESSION (MDD), SINGLE EPISODE, & POSSIBLY UNDIAGNOSED PTSD  (USMC); PTSD (Diagnosis 1st appears in VA note 3 months post discharge) & compatible with incomplete  PDHRA currently evaluated by VA at 70% disabling)	
2.	A.	Were these conditions present at time of misconduct?	Yes, as noted above	
	B.	Were these conditions mitigating for the misconduct?	Possibly, Not technically applicable given Applicant’s denial of any Misconduct; otherwise would at least appear potentially mitigating if not exculpating.	
3.	Were all required mental health and/or medical evaluations conducted in accordance with regulations, prior to the administrative separation of the applicant?	Uncertain due to paucity of Service Treatment Records	
4.	Medical Board Member comments:	PRIOR TO ENLISTMENT:
Per Applicant’s testimony: Basically idolized “Great, Great, Great Grandmother” who raised him.

Education Level:   12

MEPS:  
     AFQT:   45 

08 Jul 1992—USMC ENLISTMENT:

30 Jan 2000—FITREP: “ONE OF THE FEW…”

     Aug 2005—START of OIF DEPLOYMENT
     29 Dec 2005—Re-ENLISTMENT: @ Age 31

(Aug 2005 – ) Mar 2006—OIF DEPLOYMENT.

07 Jun 2007—POST-DEPLOYMENT HEALTH REASSESSMENT (PDHRA) included:
how would you rate your health in general now?  
      About the same as before I deployed but noting, “Back pain…Numbness or tingling in hands or feet…Chest pain or pressure…Diarrhea, vomiting, or frequent indigestion…Problems sleeping…Difficulty remembering…Increased irritability…
“Smoke from burning trash or feces…Sand/dust…

Also: “nightmares about it or thought about it when you did not want to…[thought avoidance]…Felt numb or detached…
Little interest or pleasure in doing things…More than half the days…
 Feeling down, depressed, or hopeless…Few or several days
12. how difficult have these problems made it for you to
do your work, take care of things at home, or get along with other people?
  Somewhat difficult
16. Would you like to schedule a visit with a chaplain or a community support counselor?   Yes
Provider Review and Interview:  [Not filled in…]”

08 May 2008—Diagnosis:  ADJUSTMENT DISORDER
 
29 May 2008—BNH Mental Health Svcs Naval Health Clinic Diagnosis History:  MAJOR DEPRESSION, SINGLE EPISODE    

30 May 2008—PRIMARY CARE MAJOR DEPRESSION, SINGLE EPISODE 

30 May 2008—DISCHARGE:  GUHC/MISCONDUCT
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Length of Service:  15 Year(s)  10  Month(s)  23  Day(s)
“CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 1994 05 11 TO 2005 12 29.”

POST SEPARATION:

26 Sep 2008 (3 months post discharge)— Outpatient Encounters Note Detail(s) ~ VA: Charleston, SC:

“CHIEF COMPLAINT:
‘I can't get anyone to help me, I served as a good marine for 15 years and got
booted out’… ’No one will hire me because of this bad conduct record’.
INTERVAL HISTORY: Mr. ___ is a 33 year old…with a 16 year military career with multiple deployments. Mr.___reported that he was ‘put Out’ of the military in May 2008 for a sexual harrassment incidence exposture [sic] that he states was blow out of porportion [sic]. He stated that he has problems with the disciplinary process that was used to dismiss him. He reports a great deal of irritability, problems concentrating, hypervigilence, problems sleeping. He also reported panic symptons and chest pains. Mr. ____is homeless, and cannot find employment. He actually has a list of places where he has applied for work…

Active Outpatient Medications…
1) CYCLOBENZAPRINE HCL 10MG TAB TAKE ONE-HALF TABLET…[tid] FOR MUSCLE RELAXATION…
2) DICYCLOMINE HCL 10MG CAP…FOUR TIMES A DAY DIZZINESS
3) LOPERAMIDE HCL 2MG CAP TAKE ONE CAPSULE…[qid] AS NEEDED FOR DIARRHEA…
4) PSYLLIUM ORAL PWD…FOR STOOL 
5) SERTRALINE HCL 100MG TAB [QD] FOR...PTSD. 
6) TRAZODONE HCL 50MG…AT BEDTIME AS NEEDED…
‘My medication is not working, I can't sleep at night’…

MENTAL STATUS EXAM:…

Appearance, Grooming, and Hygiene: Very neat in appearance
Behavior: agiated [sic], depress [sic]
Psychomotor Activity: No psychomotor disturbance
Speech: Slow, loud when talking about how he was treated in the service.
Mood…Affect: Depressive
Thought Content (including SI/HI): SI and HI present without a plan
Hallucinations and/or Delusions: No HI/or delusions present.
Thought Processes: Linear and logical
Memory and Orientation: Intact
Judgment…Insight: Good…
ASSESSMENT: Mr. _______ is a single AMM came to the session today well dressed.  He expressed a great deal of resentment and anger toward the United States Marine and the government system. He feels used and abused by the system. He does not take responsibility for anything that happen to him at the time of discharge. He made several SI/HI threats basically SI, however did not have a plan. This writer talked about patient coming into the hospital for a while in order for him to be safe. He would not consent to coming into the hospital.
In fact when this was suggested he stated that he would be alright…

[DIAGNOSES:]
Axis I: PTSD, MDD
Axis II: Deferred
Axis III: None reported
Axis IV: Can't find a job due to the misconduct on his military discharge
papers.
Presently homeless, vet stated that he has no income.
Axis V: 50

PLAN/GOALS: …scheduled for a follow up appointment on 10/2/08@2:00 with this writer…Called…homeless Coordinator. Made appointment…
Will also schedule…medication evaluation.  Vet stated that he cannot attend any type of groups at this time he is overwhelmed with his psychosocial issues… /es/…LISW-CP”

19 Feb 2009, 27 Sep 2009, 18 May 2010—Sertraline 100 mg X2 prescription “for PTSD…discontinued”

03 Sep 2010 (2 years 3 months post separation)—VA ACSW, “LISW-CP OIF/OEF Seamless Transition Coordinator” NOTE included:
“35 year old single…He went to voc rehab on yesterday to complete his paper work for school…continues to complain about intrusive thoughts and sleeplessness 
    Active Outpatient Medications [included]…   
     SERTRALINE HCL 100MG…[QD] FOR PTSD…
     TRAZODONE HCL 50MG TAB…[@] BEDTIME AS NEEDED…
MENTAL STATUS EXAM:
Behavior: Cooperative…Psychomotor Activity: No psychomotor disturbance
Speech: Slow…Mood:Dysphoric…Affect:Angry…Thought Content (including SI/HI): No SI present, some HI about wanting to hurt people…No Hallucinations and/or delusion present. Thought Processes:…Linear and logical
Memory and Orientation:…Intact…Judgment:…Good…Insight:…Good

ASSESSMENT AND TREATMENT PLAN GOALS:
Axis I: PTSD, Depression
Axis II: Deferred
Axis III: reported spasm in his back, reports headaches. 
Axis IV: Unemployed, going to school
Axis V: 55…is presently in Exposture [sic] therapy with_____ PhD. Weekly…”

02 Jun 2015— Review Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Disability Benefits Questionnaire signed by a PhD:

Mental Disorder Diagnosis #1: PTSD
ICD Code: 309.81
Mental Disorder Diagnosis #2: Alcohol abuse

Does the Veteran have a diagnosed traumatic brain injury (TBI)?
…[X] No…in records reviewed

Relevant Occupational and Educational history:
he finished high school and earned an associates in criminal justice;
he joined the marines in 94 and was d/c in 08; his duty was infantry,
and he served in the combat zone in Iraq; he has being doing pick up
work for the past 2 years and works 3-4 hours per day; he last worked
for an employer 2 years ago doing landscaping work; he was fired after
2-3 weeks for problems with irritability; he also reported having
problems with concentration on that job; he denied that he is looking
for work and is satisfied with doing pick up work and setting his own
hours…

Relevant Substance abuse history:
etoh use - he drinks 5-7 x per week and has 24 liquor drinks; denied
drug use…”

16 Oct 2018—VA “SCD” indicates:  70% evaluation for “9411-POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER” apparently effective 24 Nov 2014 noting an apparently initial unspecified rating effective 31 May 2008. 

28 Mar 2023—NDRB application receipt:

COMMENT:  

The Applicant appears to have been the product of a family situation resulting in his having been raised by his “Great, great, great [near centenarian] grandmother to whom he was devoted until her demise.  He described a rather innocuous upbringing resulting in the ambition to become a Marine, going on to having a successful 15-year career until encountering a complex set of circumstances involving apparently having been allegedly falsely accused of sexual harassment in the context of his last deployment to OIF resulting in his having been administratively separated with a GUHC but denied the opportunity to petition before a formal board.  The record and Applicant’s testimony indicated an especially difficult initial post discharge adjustment   due to a profoundly depressing sense of failure (including suicidal ideation (without intent or plans) and sudden absence of income, complicated by inability to secure gainful employment due to the GUHC characterization of his discharge, leaving him homeless.  However, he, eventually, was able to obtain therapeutic assistance from the VA, achieve substance use remission and occupational success in the realm of law enforcement, academic success obtaining AA and BS degrees, pursuing a MS and sustaining a currently 4-year marriage.  The Applicant’s limited Service Treatment Record included a PDHRA he could not recall but in which he acknowledged symptoms of depression, including insomnia, nightmares, memory difficulties, increased irritability, and numbing suggestive of depression and compatible with PTSD.  Moreover, he appeared to suggest Exposure therapy (initiated by the VA within 3 months post discharge) directed at PTSD had not been helpful.  During his PAH, he broke down in bitter tears on several occasions (by the time his wife (who was not otherwise present) appeared to have rushed “upstairs,” he was regaining composure on his own initiative).  

In conclusion, despite nominal inconsistencies, and the fact the Applicant’s  protestation of innocence limit the applicability of a Kurta guidance mental health nexus, the combination of  his PAH testimony indicating  exposure to trauma of having suffered the loss of fellow Marines with whom he was acquainted or personally assisted during his 2008 Iraq deployment, the existence of a PDHRA form suggesting PTSD-related symptoms along with his request for referral to a Chaplain, etc. (which, ironically, he could not recall having completed to his detriment during his PAH), and the appearance of a diagnosis of PTSD by the VA within 3 months post discharge along with his post discharge achievements and abiding personal suffering would appear to warrant consideration of a measure of clemency with respect to possible errors in judgment while deployed.   	

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 Board found 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 Applicant was notified of Separation Proceedings on 10 October 2007 by reason of misconduct evidenced by a Criminal Investigation Division (CID) investigation initiated on 18 May 2007 and a Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) investigation of 8 April 2006, both initiated to investigate the Applicant’s misconduct.  Specifically, the CID investigation alleged that he had conducted himself in an unprofessional and inappropriate manner by directing indecent language and behavior towards a female MCCS, exposing himself to that employee, and showing lude photographs to other female MCCS employees.  The NCIS investigation asserted the Applicant had wrongfully engaged in prohibited intimate and/or personal relationships with Third Country Nationals while assigned in Camp Fallujah, Iraq.  The Applicant requested a hearing before an Administrative Separation Board (ASB), which convened on 19 November 2007 and found by a vote of 3 to 0 that the allegation of commission of a serious offense was supported by a preponderance of the evidence.  They further unanimously recommended separation, and that the discharge be characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions), though the convening authority had recommended separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.

In accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, servicemembers may be separated based on the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the commanding officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial for the same or closely related offense.  Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction, however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence.  The statements and documents provided by the Applicant do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case.  The Applicant was provided the opportunity to present his case at the ASB he requested.

In determining discharge characterization of service, the Applicant’s conduct forms the primary basis for consideration.  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 his issue.  Although he contends he was innocent of the charges, there is insufficient evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced sufficient evidence, to demonstrate his innocence of the alleged misconduct and overrule the findings of the ASB.

The NDRB did consider that the Applicant had been a strong performer prior to the misconduct and was awarded three Letters of Appreciation, a Certificate of Appreciation, five Meritorious Masts, three Sea Service Deployment Ribbons, a Marine Corps Recruiting Ribbon, the Global War on Terrorism Service and Expeditionary Medals, two National Defense Service Medals, an Iraq Campaign Medal with two service stars, four Good Conduct Medals, four Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medals, and two Joint Service Achievement Medals.  However, the totality of the Applicant’s misconduct reflected a gross lack of judgement and was in contrast to the Marine Corps’ core values.  Although the Applicant claimed he was innocent, thereby negating the role of his mental health in mitigating misconduct, the NDRB nonetheless considered how his mental health might have mitigated the alleged misconduct.  The NDRB was incapable of identifying a sufficient level of mitigation for his actions and decisions that would be supported by his reported condition to fully exculpate the misconduct, especially considering the premeditated and repetitive nature of his misconduct while in Iraq.  After an exhaustive review, the NDRB determined that PTSD did not mitigate the Applicant’s misconduct, nor was his discharge inequitable in light of his previous service.  The NDRB considered that his misconduct was a significant negative aspect within his military career, though did not find that it rose to constitute a significant departure of military conduct in the context of his more than fourteen years of service to the Marine Corps, which was likely why the command separated him with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge instead of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge, which the serious nature of the offenses permitted.  

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 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 with a corresponding separation code of GKQ1, and the reentry code shall  RE-4.  The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB.  The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149.  

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, go to https://www.va.gov/find-locations/?facilityType=health.