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

     

 ex-FA, USNR
Docket No. ND99-01207

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990908, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000512.  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:  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620225.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 24, Character of Service, should read:  “GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)” vice “GENERAL” and Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read:  "PERSONALITY DISORDER" vice "PERSONALITY DISORDER, NOT AMOUNTING TO A DISABILITY, BUT WHICH POTENTIALLY INTERFERES WITH ASSIGNMENTS OR PERFORMANCE OF DUTY".  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:    None
	Inactive:  None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  960314		Date of Discharge:  970919

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  03  16
	Inactive:  00  02  20

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  66

Highest Rate:  FA (E-2)

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.0 (1)	Behavior:  2.0 (1)		OTA:  2.67 (5.0 eval)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620225.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

[ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD AND UNABLE TO OBTAIN FROM APPLICANT OR PREVIOUS COMMAND.]

960604:	Commenced 36 months of active duty under the Fireman Apprenticeship Training Program.

970724:	Mental Health Clinic, Pearl Harbor, HI:  This was the 1st mental health evaluation for this 20 year old, single, Caucasian male, FA/AD/USN with 1 year 1 month continuous active duty service, assigned to USS REUBEN JAMES (FFG-57).  The pt was referred by Chaplain W_ for eval of stress, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideations.  Chief complaint - "Thoughts of suicide due to stress of being underway all the time."
	HISTORY OF PRESENT ILLNESS:  Pt presented with a chronic pattern of personality defects characterized by marked impulsivity, affective instability, recurrent suicidal ideation, identity disturbance, chronic feelings of emptiness, low frustration tolerance, and low self-esteem.  He also had history of significant cannabis abuse, recurrent depressive episodes (treatment interrupted by an out of state move), and instability of employment/education prior to enlistment.  He acknowledged knowingly falsifying information (i.e., drug use, psychiatric history) on enlistment documents.  Contrary to his expectations, the pt has found military life to be extremely stressful and intolerable.  He complained that he did not like having to observe the numerous rules of the military, did not like the regimented lifestyle, the high level of stress, and did not like going out to sea.  Some of stress has been experienced in form of frequent tension headaches.  He also reported an increase in suicidal ideation, which progressed to contemplating death by overdose or by shooting himself.  He met with navy chaplain on few occasions and was ultimately referred for mental health eval.
	DIAGNOSIS:  AXIS I:  Occupational Problem, Prior History of Cannabis Abuse; AXIS II:  Borderline Personality Disorder (Principal Diagnosis); AXIS III:  No known contributory illnesses; AXIS IV:  military life; AXIS V:  current GAF: 50
	CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: 1 -  Service member is not mentally ill, but manifests a longstanding disorder or character and behavior, which is of such severity that it renders this individual incapable of serving adequately in the Navy.  Service member does not require nor will benefit from psychiatric hospitalization.  Short-term mental health treatment for his condition is of limited benefit, and long-term treatment is not available within the military.  Although not considered at imminent risk for suicide or homicide currently, this service member is judged to represent a continuing danger to self or others if retained in the Navy.  This member is deemed fit for return to duty for immediate processing for Administrative Separation, which should be initiated expeditiously, in compliance with NAVMILPERSMAN 3620225.  This is not a condition which would require a medical board of further evaluation prior to disposition.  
	2 - There is a notable discrepancy between the service member's verbal account and information provided on his enlistment documents.  He acknowledged falsifying information on those documents, and his clinical presentation is clearly consistent with his interview statements.  If this service member's command sow wishes, the service member may be processed for admin discharge due to FRAUDULENT ENLISTMENT.
	3- Follow up psychotherapy is not indicated, however, the pt may return to clinic as needed.  Pt is expected to continue seeking support from Chaplain W_ pending discharge.  4 - Pt has been advised of these findings, understands and agrees to comply.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970919 general (under honorable conditions) 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).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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 (C and D).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 1996 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3620225, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PERSONALITY DISORDER.

B.  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.  

C.  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.

D.  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