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

 ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND99-01037

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990729, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to young inexperienced person who didn't know what he was doing.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000420.  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 of the 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

1.  I would like my reenlistment code changed.  So I may reenlist.  At the time of my first enlistment at age 18.  I had not idea of the future consequences.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Statement from applicant
Statement from applicant's mother
Character reference from Reverend of St. Bartholomew Church dated August 20, 1997
Job/character reference dated August 10, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	890720 - 890731	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  890801		Date of Discharge:  900606

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  10  06
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  54

Highest Rate:  AR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)	Behavior:  2.80 (1)		OTA:  2.60

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  BER 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  9 

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:

891216:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0645, 16Dec89.

891217:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0700, 17Dec89 (1 day/surrendered).

900214:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0630, 14Feb90.

900216:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 1003, 16Feb90 (2 days/ surrendered).

900303:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0900, 3Mar90.

900304:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 1120, 4Mar90 (1 day/surrendered).

900317:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0630, 17Mar90.

900322:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 1512, 22Mar90 (5 days/ surrendered).

900413:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Diagnosed by competent medical authority as having a personality disorder (marital problem, malingerine, dependent personality disorder, immature features, no diagnosis.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

900602:	Medical officer statement: Applicant diagnosed with personality disorder.  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.  Applicant turned himself in following 21 days UA on 29 May.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900606 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).

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy or Marine Corps.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Pers-282, 5720 Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant requested that the reason for his discharge be changed to “young inexperienced person who didn’t know what he was doing.”  The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of a discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  The service record clearly documents a personality disorder which resulted in the applicant’s discharge.  No other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the applicant was discharged.  To change the Narrative Reason for Separation would be inappropriate.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  The applicant must be aware that there is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB.  The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 9, effective 
14 Dec 89 until 13 Jun 90, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

B.  NAVOP 013/87 (CNO 201614ZFEB87) Delegated authority to Special Court-Martial Convening Authorities (SPCMCA's) to administratively separate enlisted members in certain circumstances.  Authority was delegated for separation of enlisted members with Honorable, General, or Entry Level discharges for the following reasons where member does not object to the separation.

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