TRG
							Docket No: 6099-06
							17 December 2007

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

Subj:	REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF

Ref:	(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) Case Summary
(2)	Subject’s naval record

1.	Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Petitioner, a former member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that the reason for his discharge and reenlistment code be changed. He is also requesting that the unearned portion of his Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) not be recouped.

2.	The Board, consisting of Mr. Mr. ~ and Ms. McCormick, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and on 12 December 2007 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

3.	The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:

a.	Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.	Petitioner’s application was filed in a timely manner.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 18 August 1999 at age
17.	He subsequently completed Nuclear Power Training and qualified as a submariner. He reenlisted in the Navy on 14 December 2001 and was paid an SRB.

d.	On 8 October 2003, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment for discharging a firearm through negligence. The punishment imposed included a reduction in rate to petty officer third class, On 19 November 2003 he was seen in the Mental Health Clinic by a psychiatrist. At that time, he was diagnosed with a “Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode, Moderate, in Partial Remission” and a “Personality Disorder, not Otherwise Specified (with Borderline and Antisocial Features)”. The psychiatrist strongly recommended Petitioner’s administrative separation because his condition put him at chronic risk for suicidal behavior with continued exposure to the stressors common to life in the Navy.

e.	Petitioner was honorably discharged on 31 December 2003 by reason of a diagnosed personality disorder with an RE-3G reenlistment code. At that time, he was issued a DD Form 214 showing that he had completed 4 years, 5 months and 18 days of active service.

f.	After discharge, Petitioner filed a hotline complaint with the Inspector General contending that he had been improperly discharged without the required administrative discharge processing documentation. After review the local IG essentially concluded that because of errors in coordination between two different commands, Petitioner was sent home without the required administrative procedures being followed. Petitioner was advised to petition this Board or the Naval Discharge Review Board as appropriate for a correction to his record.

g.	Petitioner applied to this Board contending that the reason for his discharge and reenlistment code should be changed because he does not have a personality disorder and should not have been discharged for that reason. He has submitted evidence showing that after discharge he passed a psychological screening to become a police officer. He has completed training and is now employed as a police officer.

h.	Petitioner is also requesting that the Board take action to stop the recoupment of the unearned portion of his reenlistment bonus and that any amounts already recouped be refunded to him.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants partial favorable action. The Board considered the psychological evaluation he submitted that found him to be currently acceptable for employment as a police officer. However, the Board notes that the psychologist who conducted the evaluation did not indicate that he considered or was even aware of the evaluation performed while Petitioner was in the Navy. Further, the Board is aware that a personality disorder may only become manifest when an individual is under stress and Petitioner may not have been under stress during the second psychological evaluation. Therefore, the Board finds no basis for removal of the Navy psychiatric documentation from Petitioner’s record

Concerning his request for a change in the reason for his discharge and reenlistment code, it is clear that once he was found to be at risk to harm himself or others, expeditious discharge was inevitable. Therefore, he has been treated no differently than others in his situation. Although the IG found that proper notification of discharge processing was not accomplished, it was left to the Board to fashion appropriate relief. The Board believes that since he was not entitled to an administrative discharge board and even if he had consulted with counsel and submitted a statement requesting retention, that given the circumstances, discharge would still have occurred. Since the reenlistment code was assigned based on the reason for discharge, there is no basis to change it.

However, an error did occur and the Board believes that some form of relief is appropriate. Since the error resulted in recoupment of the unearned portion of his reenlistment bonus, Petitioner’s record should be corrected, where appropriate to show that he is entitled to keep the SRB payments he received before his discharge on 31 December 2003.

The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reasons for the corrections to his record.

RECOMMENDATION:

a.	That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he is entitled to SRB payments received before his discharge on 31 December 2003. Any such payments that may have already been recouped should be returned to Petitioner. He is not entitled to any SRB payments that would have occurred after 31 December 2003.

b.	That the remainder or Petitioner’s requests be denied.

c.	That this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.

4.	It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled 
matter.
	
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN	  BRIAN . GEORGE
Recorder	  Acting Recorder

5.	Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
	                             
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

								W. DEAN PFEIFFER
		Executive Director