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

 ex-HM3, USN
Docket No. ND02-00319

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020116, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to "Erroneously discharged by Commanding Officer."  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 020912.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  However, the Board did note that the discharge was improperly executed.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the reason for discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-164 (formerly 3630900), Separation Code:  JFF.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  I was discharged erroneously due to the fact that the required NAVPERS 1070/613 Counseling/Warning Entry had not been performed (as specifically denoted on DOCUMENT 2/ BLK 25 of the DD-214, which was the discharge authority used for my separation).  I had been administered an administrative NAVPERS 1070/613 (DOCUMENT 3, not a counseling/warning entry) on 03 NOV 00 to document being awarded Extra Military Instruction (EMI) for performance/appearance deficiencies, which both corrected and improved my performance as well as my appearance (as specifically denoted in DOCUMENT 4).
It is specifically denoted in MILPERSMAN 1910-122 (DOCUMENT 2), "Member must have received a NAVPERS 1070/613 Administrative Remarks, counseling and warning (MILPERSMAN 1910-200) and be given an opportunity to overcome his/her deficiencies in performance and conduct prior to any administrative separation action for personality disorder." Per DOCUMENT 5, I did not receive a mid-term counseling (it was specifically denoted "NOT REQ" on BLK 30, which means that it was not done because it was not required to be done); per DOCUMENT 4, I not only received a mid-term counseling, but the deficiencies had been corrected (because it was specifically commented "Continue the improvement in both performance and appearance" by the counselor on that document, who was my Leading Petty Officer at the time).  I received no other NAVPERS 1070/613 entries in my service record or any other counseling for performance or appearance after 03 NOV 00, for the duration of my tour at my last command prior to separation.
Per DOCUMENT 2, it is specifically denoted " EXCEPTION: Where the member is diagnosed by a competent MHP to be a danger to him/herself or others, the requirement for a NAVPERS 1070/613 counseling and warning does not apply." Per DOCUMENT 6, it was specifically denoted "At not time has he been considered dangerous to himself or others." thus the NAVPERS 1070/613 counseling/warning entry would have applied; since it wasn't done, the discharge was an error.

Due to the above noted discrepancies, I would like BLK 27 of my DD-214 to be changed from RE-4 to RE-3G, RE-R1, or RE-1 (preferably RE-R1).
In addition to having my re-entry code changed (as above noted) and those changes pertaining to my reason for discharge (as above noted in Item #3), 1 request that the Separation Program Designation (SPD) code for the designated Narrative Reason For Discharge (BLK 28 of DD-214 and above noted Item #3) be left blank on my new DD-214/215 (or other pertinent document entered in my service record relevant to my discharge, as a result of the NDRB or further action of the BCNR); on my investigation, there are no SPD codes issued for an Erroneous Discharge in OPNAV INSTRUCTION 1900.2 (Transition Assistance Management Program) or any other credible source of pertinent information.

Note:
If requested to be at the hearing by the Chairman, I would thus like to reserve the right to bring up any other relevant issues pertaining to my discharge OR with the Commanding Officer NMC Pearl Harbor (the C.O. who locally discharged me from the United States Naval Service in error on 08 Mar 01, supporting documents are attached) for the purpose of granting approval of this application, expediting the process of myself being reinstated in the Navy, or other favorable actions that the board may recommend to other entities such as the Board of Correction of Naval Records (BCNR).

Documentation

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

Applicant's DD Form 214
Memorandum from applicant dated November 1, 2001
Attachment to the DD Form 293
MILPERSMAN 1910-122 (7 pages)
Administrative remarks dated November 3, 2000
Evaluation Report and Counseling Record unsigned, and undated
Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated February 26, 2001
Memorandum from psychiatrist dated February 1, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	941119 - 950604	COG
	Active:   USN			950605 - 990711	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990712		Date of Discharge:  010308

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  07  27
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  3

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  72

Highest Rate:  HM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.00 (1)	Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  2.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, GCM, AFSM, AFEM, NUC, FMFR, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

HONORABLE/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990712:	Applicant reenlisted for 3 years.

000331:	NavMedClinic, Pearl Harbor, HI, Psychiatric Evaluation:  24 year old, single male, HM3, USN, with 4 years and 10 months continuous active duty, was ordered to submit to this evaluation in anticipation of charges being referred to Captain's Mast.  SNM read, understood and signed the Limits of Confidentiality statement.  …SNM adamantly denied that he had any problems except that his chain-of-command did not appreciate him.  Except for the lack of self-esteem, he denied any mood changes and neurovegetative signs of depression or anxiety.  He was evaluated for "dyslexia" three years ago, but no treatment was prescribed or recommended.
	MENTAL STATUS EXAM:  Appeared his stated age, in NAD: alert and oriented; very defensive and extremely reluctant to give details about himself; well groomed and neatly attired in UOD; good eye contact and NL psychomotor activity; speech normal in rate, rhythm, volume; mood "tired, horny, bored" with blunt and inappropriate affect; TP disjointed, circumstantial, tangential, illogical; TC defensive and projecting blame on everyone else; no delusions, hallucinations, referential ideation, suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation; intelligence average, cognition unimpaired; no insight, immature judgment, good impulse control. 
	DIAGNOSES:  Deferred.  Schizotypal Personality Disorder is a strong consideration.
	FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
	1.  SNM suffers from no medical condition, which warrants medical board action.
	2.  There are no psychiatric contraindications for appropriate disciplinary, legal or administrative action as Command sees fit.
	3.  RTC 10 Apr for continued evaluation, including MMPI and MCMI.
	4.  SNM understood and agreed with the above recommendation.
	5.  Liaison with CO/XO as to these findings/recommendations.

000505:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave, violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer; non-commissioned officer, or petty officer, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Unlawful entry.
	Award: Forfeiture of $668 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to HMSN.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

010201:	Head, Mental Health Dept, Pearl Harbor, HI:  25  year old, single Caucasian male was first seen by psychiatry in March 2000, on a command-directed mental health referral within the context of pending Captain's Mast.  Has been evaluated by Capt A. R_ and since has been followed by Capt R_ and myself (Cdr D_ M_, CDR, psychiatrist), with a diagnosis of Schizotypal Personality Disorder.  At no time has he been considered dangerous to himself or others.  Pt has a personality disorder of such severity as to impair his ability to function effectively in the naval environment.  Recommend process for routine administrative separation.

010212:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) on the basis of a diagnosed schizotypal personality disorder.

010214:	Applicant advised of rights and elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation, submit statements and elected an administrative board, if eligible.  Note:  Applicant not eligible for administrative board.

010221:	Commanding Officer, Naval Medical Clinic, Pearl Harbor directed discharge with an honorable on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder.

010221:	Commanding Officer, Naval Medical Clinic, Pearl Harbor directed discharge under honorable conditions for convenience of the government on the basis schizotypal personality disorder.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 010308 with an honorable characterization of service 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 equitable but improperly executed (C and D).

Issue 1:  The Applicant was diagnosed with a Schizotypal Personality Disorder by competent medical authority at the Mental Health Department, Naval Medical Clinic, Pearl Harbor, HI.  The official record clearly indicates that the Applicant was no longer able to perform adequately in the Naval Service, however, there is no evidence in the official record to indicate that the Applicant was provided with the appropriate counseling/retention warning (NAVPERS 1070/613) prior to his discharge.  Thus, the Board has determined the Narrative Reason for Separation, Block 28, shall change from Personality Disorder to Secretarial Authority (Best Interest of the Service (BIOTS)).  The Separation Code (SPD), Block 26, shall be changed to JFF.  Relief warranted.

Issue 2:  Concerning the Applicant’s request to change his RE-code.  The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes (Reentry Code, Block 27), or make recommendations to permit reenlistment into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  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 done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 27, effective 
27 March 2000 until 13 Aug 2001, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225), Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s) 

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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “afls14.jag.af.mil”.

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
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023