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

 
 ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00070

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021009, 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 20030912.  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)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

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

Documentation

Only the Applicant’s service and medical recorder were reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19951122 - 19960630	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19960701		Date of Discharge:  19990603

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  11  03
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  51

Highest Rate:  AA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*	Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Navy “E” Ribbon, M16 Marksmanship Award

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980608:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134:  General Article.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

981207:	Admission to Naval Medical Center, San Diego (NMCSD), Mental Health Services:  This is the first psychiatric hospitalization for this 21 year-old married, Caucasian male who is an undesignated airman on the John C. Stennis with 3 years of continues active duty.
	Chief Complaint:  Paralysis of bilateral lower extremities (without know medical etiology)
	History of Present Illness:  The historical information is felt to be reliable.  Source of such data includes the pt and available medical records.  On the morning of admission, pt was brought to emergency room at NMCSD by his wife; he had awakened at 0200 that morning with the inability to move both legs from toes to waist.  He, however, retained sensation in both legs, as well as bowel and bladder function.  He was evaluated in emergency room by internal medicine and neurology and assessed as having no medical etiology for his symptoms.  He had a similar presentation in 9/97, had a negative medical work-up, was treated briefly with intravenous immunoglobulin and had complete resolution of his symptoms within three days of his hospitalization.  His medical work-up included a negative head MRI and a non-diagnostic EMG.  At that time, his symptoms were preceded by significant occupational stress. Pt reported that two days prior to admission, he and his wife had argued and later agreed that they would separated for thirty days.  He was supposed to move out of their home on the day of admission.  In their three months of marriage, the couple had argued about household management and his poor memory, frequently resulting in his wife’s threats to end the marriage (with an annulment).  He reported feeling distressed that she had recently been interacting with her former fiancé.  She had refrained from intimate relations with the pt for approximately 2½ months.  Physical exam and initial mental status exam conducted.  Course of Treatment:  Pt admitted to open psychiatry unit where he was afforded group, individual, milieu, and recreational therapies..His command was contacted with regard to a plan of administrative separation, to which they agreed.  Pt remarked that he would like to attend college once he is discharged from the Navy. 
	Discharge Diagnostic Assessment:
	AXIS I:  (300.11) Conversion Disorder, resolved
		   (V61.1) Partner Relational Problem
AXIS II: (301.6) Dependent Personality Disorder Borderline Personality    Features 
AXIS III: No Diagnosis
AXIS IV: marital discord, work stressors, somatic complaints, dissatisfaction with Navy
	AXIS V (Admission): 41-50 Serious symptoms or difficulty functioning
AXIS V (Current):      51-60 Moderate Symptoms or difficulty in 
                                              Functioning
AXIS V (highest):      71-80 Symptoms are transient and expectable
                                              Reactions to stressors
Plan and Recommendation:  Pt is neither suicidal nor homicidal.  Pt is not in need of psychiatric medication at this time. Pt is not in need of further psychiatric treatment at this time.  Administrative separation is recommended on the following grounds:  Service member is not considered mentally ill but manifests a longstanding disorder of character and behavior which is of such severity as to render this individual incapable of serving adequately in the Navy.  The member does not presently require and will not benefit from hospitalization or psychiatric treatment.  Member is deemed fit to return to duty for processing for administrative separation, which should be initiated expeditiously in compliance with NAVMILPERSCOM INSTRUCTION 1910.1D and NAVOP 013/87.

981218:	Retention Warning issued.  [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS JOHN C STENNIS, LTR OF 10MAY99.] 

990422:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence from unit for 7 days; violation of UCMJ Article 107:  False Official Statement; violation of UCMJ Article 123:  Submitting a false writing.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $479 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 00 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990422:	Mental Health Unit, Branch Medical Clinic, San Diego, CA:  21 year old married Caucasian male currently stationed on USS JOHN C STENNIS for 7 months referred for evaluation of suicidal ideation.  Chief Complaint:  “Been having thoughts of killing myself the past 4 days.”  Pt reported spouse recently asked for a divorce (4/19/99) and today he “went to MAST” secondary to going “UA” for 7 days in March 99 and than deceiving command.  He’s now on 35 days restriction.  Pt reported experiencing mixed emotions (dysphoria, emptiness, anger, confusion) and wants out of the USN.  Psychiatric history positive for prior hospitalization at NMCSO (See “Narrative Summary 12/11/98”).  Pt was diagnosed with a personality disorder – dependent and borderline features, and Administrative Separation was recommended for ‘longstanding disorder of character and behavior’.  Pt denied any history of alcohol/substance abuse and noted excessive drinking “last night”.  Family psychiatric history reportedly …………….(Second page missing from health record.)

990510:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, as evidenced by non-judicial punishment of 22 Apr 1999 and for Personality Disorder, as evidenced by psychiatric evaluations of 11 Dec 1998 and 22 Apr 1999.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim):  “AR S_ (Applicant) has shown by his actions that he cannot and will not conform his behavior to that expected of members of the United States Navy.  He was diagnosed with a personality disorder in December 1998, and was issued a page 13 counseling/warning in accordance with reference (b) (MILPTERSMAN 1910-122) explaining that further deficiencies in performance or conduct could be used as a basis for separation.  His performance and behavior did not improve; rather, he continued to commit misconduct as evidenced by his 22 April 1999 NJP.  This member was again seen at the Mental Health Unit for suicidal ideations on 22 April 1999.  The diagnosis and recommendation were unchanged from his first evaluation.  It is therefore recommended that he be separated at the earliest opportunity with an Other Than Honorable discharge.”

990427:	COMCARGRU SEVEN directed the Applicant's discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990603 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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, D, and E).

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

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No errors or inequities were discovered in the execution the Applicant’s discharge.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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.  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 can be considered.  Examples of documents to forward to the Board for consideration include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment record(s), documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle (if appropriate).  At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief will be granted.

He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT- COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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.

E.  In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 107 (false official statement), and Article 123 (forgery), if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial

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