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

   

 ex-MMFA, USN
Docket No. ND99-00556

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990316, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable or Entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge changed to Convenience of the Government.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000110.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Other physical/mental conditions - personality disorder, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. The following issues are the reasons I believe my General Discharge form the United States Navy, should be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge.

If you disagree, please explain in detail why you disagree.  The presumption of regularity that might normally permit you to assume that the service acted correctly in characterizing my service as less than Honorable does not apply to my case, because of the evidence I am submitting.

I strongly believe that clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for me to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a General Discharge.  Under the current circumstances at which I live, I would not receive the type of discharge I did in 1992.
Since my discharge from the United States Navy, I have continued being a good citizen and, not to mention a good husband, to my wife and a good father to my 5 year old daughter.

At the time of my service I sincerely feel that my ability to serve was impaired by my youth and immaturity.  Because when I enlisted in 1990 1 was already having family and personal problems that I was always trying to run from.  I thought that if I joined the United States Armed Forces, that maybe those problems would go away.  But as time went on, more problems continued to add up on me.

Shortly after I transferred to my first duty station I went extremely in debt, and got caught up in a very unhealthy relationship.  All of this began to lead to psychiatric and certain other problems that all hampered my ability to focus on just what my duty in the United States Navy was.  My motivation left me for a while, or should I say I left it for a while.

Needless to say, when I realized that I was in over my head with everything, I did try to speak with my Leading Petty Officers, and my Engineering Department Officer, about a hardship discharge.  But this request never made it to my Commanding Officer, because they simply told me I was not eligible for that.  I then started getting in trouble at my command, as you can see by my military records.  And I deeply regret all of those actions to this day.  I never even mention my military career to anyone because of the embarrassment that it brings.

Please believe me when I say, that I tried to serve and wanted to but all of the problems I was having just wouldn't allow me to.

My last and final reason that I request for this discharge upgrade is that when I sat down with my legal and personnel officers, I was told that I would still be eligible for all of the veterans benefits, including the Montgomery GI Bill.  Even though my discharge was a General.

Unfortunately I have found this to be a lie, and if I would have known this at the time of my discharge, I would have fought harder to receive an Honorable Discharge.

As of this date I am currently enrolled as a full-time student at Catawba Valley Community College in Hickory, North Carolina.  Needless to say I am paying my tuition out of my own pocket.  I also am holding down a full-time job at Shurtape Technologies, in Hickory.

My plans are to transfer to Lenoir-Rhyne College in the spring of 2000, if I can get this discharge overturned, so that I can afford to go on to a graduate college.  As of right now though, being married and paying my bills takes about everything I make.  And this is not going to be possible if I can't get some financial help.

If I do get to attend Lenoir-Rhyne next spring, I plan on majoring in Social Science, with a minor in Sociology and Psychology.  Because I want to become a counselor for troubled teens and young adults.  To possibly keep them from making some of the mistakes I have made in my early years.

I really can not make any more plans with my future, until I receive word on your decision with the matter at hand.  I would like to add in closing, that if there were anyway possible for me to go back in to the United States Navy and finish my tour of duty.  I would not think twice of doing it just so I can then get my Honorable Discharge, which I would then be proud of hanging on my wall at home.

Please take all of the circumstances that I have presented to you and other supporting documents that are enclosed before you make your final decision on this matter.  I would truly appreciate, careful handling of this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copy of applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4 (2 copies)
Copy of applicant's DD Form 215 (3 copies)
Sixty-three pages from applicant's service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)		890811 - 900717	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900718		Date of Discharge:  920214

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  06  28
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  MMFA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.80 (2)	Behavior:  2.80 (2)		OTA:  2.80

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Other physical/mental conditions - personality disorder, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

900719:	Retention Warning: You are being retained in the naval service, despite your defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by your failure to disclose your preservice civil involvement/drug abuse.  This decision is based on the information you provided to the Recruit Quality Assurance Interviewer and if found not factual, this waiver is void and you can be subject to other judicial or administrative proceedings. Speeding ticket, 12/89.

900723:	Applicant briefed on Navy policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

911108:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Dereliction in the performance of duties, larceny and underage drinking), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

911111:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Derelict in the performance of duty; violation of UCMJ Article 122: Larceny; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Underage drinking.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $400 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 20 days, reduction to MMFR.  Forfeiture of $200 per month and reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920110:	Applicant diagnosed with (1) alcohol abuse, (2) financial problems, (3) borderline personality disorder with passive aggressive and antisocial traits, (4) S/P overdose ibuprofen - stable.  The psychiatrist recommended separation based on a personality disorder of such severity as to render the applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  Applicant was considered self-destructive and a continuing risk of harm to self or others.

920128:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of Convenience of the Government on the basis of a diagnosed Personality disorder of such severity as to render the applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service as evidenced by medical evaluation that you are considered to present a continuing risk to do harm to yourself or others.

920205:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

920213:	Medical evaluation: Applicant found not dependent on drugs.  Applicant is in a state of developing alcoholism.

920309:	Commanding officer directed discharge General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of Convenience of the Government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  Applicant discharged on 14 February 1992. 

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920214 under Honorable conditions (General) for Convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service. (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims it is an injustice for him to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a General discharge.  The consequences of a less than Honorable discharge can be and have been overcome by many applicants.  However, there is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct, subsequent to leaving military service.  The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization typical of other service members being separated for the same reason) of each applicant’s discharge to determine if proper procedures were followed.  This applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Additionally, the NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general).  Those factors include but are not limited to the following:  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate).  The applicant did not provided any documentation of good character or conduct, which would warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  The applicant is encouraged to establish a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments.  Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements.  He remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge.  Legal representation at the hearing is advisable.  Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 2, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims his ability to serve was impaired by his youth and immaturity.  The Board determined that the applicant’s age, education level and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  While he may believe his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his action, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his action.  Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims he was extremely in debt, caught up in an unhealthy relationship and had other problems that hampered his ability to focus on his duty.  The Board found nothing in the applicant’s record nor did the applicant submit any supporting documentation that showed that his personal problems were of sufficient magnitude that they could not be resolved through standard military channels or by the applicant’s chain of command.  In fact, the Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, test scores, prior service, promotions and awards were sufficient to qualify him for enlistment. Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 4, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims his legal and personnel officers told him he would still be eligible for veteran benefits, including the GI Bill, even though his discharge was General (under Honorable conditions).  The applicant’s record contains the Veterans’ Educational Assistance Act of 1984 (New GI Bill) standard form 2366, which clearly states “I must receive an Honorable discharge for service, which established entitlement to the New GI Bill.”  The applicant signed this form on 23JUL90, indicating he was aware of this requirement to qualify for educational benefits.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 1991 until 04 Mar 1993, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

B.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 1991 until 04 Mar 1993, Article 3620225, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL AT THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - BASIS OF PERSONALITY DISORDER.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.  The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness.  You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon St SE Rm 309
		Washington, D.C.  20374-5023