DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2436-20 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 (NR20200002436) 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed the enclosure with this Board requesting that his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) be corrected to reflect an upgrade of his service characterization from general to honorable. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 2 June 2020, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of his naval service 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. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and started a period of active duty on 2 August 1993. He reported to duty onboard . On 30 June 1995, he received a psychiatric evaluation and was diagnosed with a personality disorder. Petitioner was not found to be mentally ill. d. On 8 July 1995, Petitioner was notified of administrative separation proceedings against him on the basis of the convenience of the government due to a diagnosed personality disorder. e. Petitioner’s Enlisted Performance Record indicates that on 14 July 1995, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP). On 15 July 1995, he was seen by Medical for a follow up appointment due to his reaction to the NJP. He was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depression non-problematic, partner relationship problems, and alcohol abuse; his diagnosis of personality disorder, not otherwise specified with dependent avoidance features was confirmed. f. Petitioner was discharged from the Navy on 24 July 1995, on the basis of personality disorder and received a general characterization of service and a reentry (RE) code of RE-3G. g. On 20 March 2003, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) reviewed Petitioners discharge and found it to be proper as issued and determined that no charge was warranted. h. In his application for correction, Petitioner requests an upgrade to his general characterization of service. Petitioner’sapplication indicates that he developed Chronic Fatigue Syndrome while he was on active duty and his illness was the reason for his misconduct. Petitioner states that his whole life changed after his illness and his ability to concentrate, his stamina, and pain caused him to fail at what he wanted to be a career. Petitioner provides statements from family, friends, and peers to support his request. Petitioner submits medical records from his time in active service to show the approximate time he contracted the illness; he also submits post-discharge medical records. Petitioner claims that, while he was on active duty, he developed chicken pox and was removed from the ship for approximately a month. When he returned, he was not aware of the lawful order to attend all flight deck parades, and his lack of awareness ultimately resulted in NJP. Petitioner states that, around the same time, he was having marital troubles. He confided in a Navy psychiatrist who “wrote (him) up for a personality disorder and said (he) was not fit for duty.” Petitioner contends that he wanted someone to help him but instead someone hurt him. i. The Board considered Petitioner’s request for a change to his discharge to reflect an upgrade from general to honorable. The Board weighed Petitioner’s assertion that he suffered from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome while he was serving in the Navy and reviewed his claim that the illness impacted his ability to serve successfully. The Board also reviewed Petitioner’s contentions that he submitted to NDRB in support of his request for a change to his records, as well as post-discharge medical records which indicate a gradual onset of constant episodes of severe fatigue which worsen after exertion or stress. The Board took into account the personal letters of support for Petitioner’s request which indicate that even the most basic of tasks such as housework or walking are currently a challenge. CONCLUSION: The Board noted that Petitioner’s application raises the issue of fitness for duty at the time of his discharge. The Board found that based on the available, in-service records to include Petitioner’s 30 June 1995 diagnosis of personality disorder, Petitioner does not appear to have a medical condition or disability that would have qualified him for a medical discharge or retirement under SECNAVINST 1850.4 series. The Board noted that there is no evidence of a diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome while Petitioner was in the Navy. The Board determined that his documented medical evaluations from his time in the Navy coupled with the misconduct reflected by the 14 July 1995 NJP support his current administrative discharge. With respect to Petitioner’s request for an upgrade to his discharge characterization, the Board noted that Petitioner’s available record does notcontain detailed information about his 14 July 1995 NJP. Absent the specifics about the NJP, and in consideration of Petitioner’s struggles as documented by in-service psychiatric evaluations and his personal challenges, the Board found that Petitioner’s record should be corrected to reflect an honorable characterization of service. The Board determined that Petitioner appears to have been properly diagnosed with personality disorder and his administrative discharge was executed on the basis of that diagnosis. The Board found that at time of his discharge in 1995, the narrative reason of separation of “Personality Disorder” for administrative discharges such as Petitioner’s complied with the regulatory guidance. However, in light of increasing protections for medical and personal information since 1995, the Board found that the narrative reason of separation of “Personality Disorder” should be corrected to “Secretarial Authority.” The Board found that Petitioner’s Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) should be changed to reflect an honorable characterization of service and a narrative reason of “Secretarial Authority.” In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 24 July 1995, Petitioner was issued an honorable discharge by reason of “Secretarial Authority.” That Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214. That a copy of this reportof proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 12 March 2020. 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. 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 Regulation, 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.