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

ex-LtJG, USNR 
Docket No. ND03-00729

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030320.  The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to “separation code to reflect normal separation code.”  The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Nashville, TN.  The Applicant designated the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary record review prior to any personal appearance hearing and also advised Applicant that the NDRB does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington National Capital Region.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040617.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service and reason for discharge was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the reason for the discharge shall remain.  HONORABLE/ PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: SECNAVINST 1920/6B.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “The reason for discharge is improper because it reflects a non-existant disorder.  Enclosed is sufficient evidence from various psychologists stating that I do not a personality disorder.  I want the separation code of JFX removed from the DD214 and changed to MBK.  I also want the narrative reason for separation changed from personality disorder to completion of service obligation.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (AMERICAN LEGION):

2.  “On behalf of the above referenced applicant, and in accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the following informal comments; and/or issue(s). 

This former member was Honorably discharged due to a personality disorder as authorized by SECNAVINST 1920.6A.

Essentially, as noted on DD Form 293, this applicant is requesting that the basis for her discharge be changed because she does not have a personality disorder. She has submitted 14 pages of additional documentation in support of her contentions for consideration.

The SR is incomplete.  In particular, the mental health evaluation that diagnosed SNFM with a personality disorder is missing.  She has submitted psychological evaluations dated 010925 and 020301 and a VA Rating Decision dated 020729 indicating that she does not have a personality disorder.  

In view of the conflicting professional medical opinions of record, we strongly opine that an advisory review by the NCPB’s psychiatrist would be indispensable for a full and fair decision of this applicant’s petition.

The American Legion’s express purpose in providing this statement, and any other submittals or opinions of record, is to aid the applicant in resolving any improprieties or inequities in the character and basis for discharge.  Moreover, we rest assured that the Naval Discharge Review Board’s final decision will reflect sound equitable principles consistent in law, regulation, policy and discretion as promulgated by title 10 U.S.C., section 1553, and set forth in 32 C.F.R., part 724; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1).

This case is now respectfully submitted to the Board for deliberation and disposition.”

Documentation

The Board could not locate the medical record.  In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214
Mental Health Dept, NavMedClinic, Pearl Harbor, Confidential Psychological Eval dtd Mar 1, 2002
Mental Health C&P Report, Honolulu VAMROC dtd Sept 17, 2001 (8 pages)
Dept of Veterans Affairs Rating Decision dtd Jul 29, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  980509		Date of Discharge:  020531

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  00  23
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22	

Education Level:  16	

Highest Rank:  LtJG

Final Officer Performance Evaluation Averages:  All officer performance reports were available to the Board for review.

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Navy “E” Ribbon, NDSM, LOC(2)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

HONORABLE/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  SECNAVINST 1920.6b

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

001017:	Medical Report USS OKANE:  Patient took 10 – 15 Tylenol 3 due to qualification failure.  Patient stated “I have two emotions, I’m either happy or I’m sad.  I’ve been sad on the ship – when I get sad, I do bad things.  Sometimes I slap myself in the face”.  

Diagnosis: 

Axis I	  Adjustment disorder with depressed mood
Axis II	  Personality disorder with borderline and dependent features (DSM IV)
Axis III  S.P. medication overdose
Axis IV  Poor shipboard adaptation
Axis IV Correct 68

Recommendation:  Member demonstrated an unstable character that makes her an unsuitable member for shipboard duty and a threat of ongoing self-harm if retained in the navy.  It is recommended she be processed for expeditious administrative separation in accordance with SECNAVINST 1920.6B for DSM-IV 301.9; and MILPERSMAN 3620225.  Clinical Psychologist.

001106:	Applicant follow-up appointment at Psychology clinic Pearl harbor for Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood  PT was seen at her request.  PT had made a suicidal gesture while on her boat about 10OCT00.  She stated that she did not want to kill herself at that time, and could not really say why she took the pills.  PT was seen at Naval Medical Clinic San Diego on 17OCT00 and was diagnosed with personality disorder no otherwise specified with borderline and dependent features.  She was recommended for an expeditious administrative separation.  PT does not want to be separated from the navy but wants to be transferred to another command.  PT has been TSD to TPU and reported having no problems at her new work center.  Discussed PT’s legal issues and options.  PT plans on fighting the admin SEP.

001120:	Applicant follow-up appointment at Psychology clinic Pearl harbor for Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood, Personality Disorder NOS with borderline and dependent traits.  PT was seen for routine follow-up.  PT reported that she is coping well with her situation.  PT is planning on fighting the admin SEP, but has not been officially notified yet.  PT does not want to go back to her boat.  PT did not earn her SWO pin with in the allotted time limit, and will notify the command that they need to send a letter to BUPERS which would take her off of sea duty.

001228:	Applicant’s Fitness Report overall average: 2.0.  Block 38:  Unable to effectively deal with stress, reflected by the suicidal gesture/attempt after her poor performance on a Helm Safety Officer oral board.  Following this incident, LTJG (Applicant) identified her problem and agreed a psychiatric evaluation was necessary.  Although LTJG (Applicant) improved attitude prompted an optimistic report in May 00, her lack of professional growth and inability to deal with stress during this reporting period have been a disappointment.  She must demonstrate the ability to take charge, set standards, and get results before earning a recommendation for promotion.  [EXTRACTED FROM FITNESS REPORT AND COUNSELING RECORD]

001228:	Applicant follow-up appointment at Psychology clinic Pearl harbor for Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood. Pt got back from leave.  Coping well with her situation. Got her FITREP which was bad.  PT feels that she has a lot of social support to help her deal with stress.  Pt is still waiting for a decision from the navy on whether or not she will be able to stay in the navy.  Continue with outpatient psychotherapy.

010306:	Applicant follow-up appointment at Psychology clinic Pearl harbor for Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood.

010725:	Applicant’s request for retention in the naval service.  [EXTRACTED FROM CHNAVPERS LTR OF 24 JAN 02.]

010917:	Mental Health, Honolulu VAMROC Outpatient:  Pt’s C file was reviewed for the purpose of this exam.  Pt was seen by the Mental Health Dept, Newport, R.I. on Aug 20, 1999.  At that time, she was on the USS O’KANE and was referred for suicidal ideation and depression.  Pt was reported having a “hard time” since joining the US Navy.  She reported worsening in the last couple of weeks with increased crying spells.  She was noted to be “very self-deprecating”.  At that time, Pt reported increased isolation, decreased exercise, increased periodic suicidal ideation and reported at that time covering her head with a plastic bag two to three times.  She was diagnosed as having adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct.  Pt was seen again in Oct 2000.  Again, at that time she was stationed aboard the USS O’KANE.  She at that time reported ingesting 10-15 Tylenol plus 3 ibuprofen due to qualification failure.  It was reported than that she was having trouble adapting to shipboard environment and had poor peer relationships.  She did not like her job and her specialization.  She was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood and occupational problem.  She also was diagnosed with personality disorder with dependent trait.  The pt was treated for the acetaminophen overdose.  There were other appointments, visits in 2000, where she was being seen by psychologist D_ S_.  She was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, occupational problem, and personality disorder not otherwise specified with dependent features..  
	There was a psychiatric evaluation, which was done on July 24, 2001 by the Mental Health Dept at the Naval Medical Clinic, Pearl Harbor.  It was noted there in the report that pt had been aboard USS O’KANE since Oct 1998 and that she first noticed the depressed mood in May 1999.  She was then diagnosed with personality disorder not otherwise specified with dependent features, adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, and occupational problem.  During deployment in Oct 2000, she made a suicide attempt.  She was then seen in San Diego on October 17, 2000 and again was diagnosed with personality disorder not otherwise specified with borderline and dependent features and adjustment disorder.  Evaluation done by Dr. N_ who recommended pt be administratively separated from the Navy.  The detachment for cause was denied so the separation for personality disorder was continued.  Since Oct 2000, Ms. N_ (Applicant) has been working on shore at Pearl Harbor.
	COMPETENCY:  Pt appeared competent to handle VA benefits in her own best interest.
	DIAGNOSES:  
AXIS I:     1. History of adjustment disorder with mixed features of mood and conduct.  2.  History of occupational problems.
AXIS II:    Deferred
AXIS III:   Non active
AXIS IV:  Limited social support, separation process from the Navy.
AXIS V:    71
SUMMARY/RECOMMENDATIONS:  Pt is a 25 year old African-American, single, active duty, LTJG in the Navy female.  Pt reportedly had occupational problems when aboard ship in the Navy.  During that time, she had an increase in depression with vegetative symptoms of increased sleeping, decreased appetite, and suicidal ideation.  Pt had Para suicidal type behaviors, which included putting a plastic bag over her head and taking an overdose in Oct 2000.  She reported that since being off the ship, she has had resolution of these symptoms.  It appeared that pt probably had an adjustment disorder due to occupational stress or perhaps depressive disorder not otherwise specified.  It appeared that this have resolved since being taken off the ship.  Currently, pt is in pre-separation from the Navy due to a previous diagnosis of personality disorder NOS.  During this interview, it was difficult to determine that if indeed the pt had a personality disorder.  By history that she reported and by her presentation, it was not readily apparent.  It is possible that due to her adjustment disorder or depressive disorder NOS triggered by occupational stress, that whatever personality traits that she does have may have been exaggerated during her time of increased stress.  Pt may have some underlying borderline traits.  She does have some ongoing issues that appear to date back to childhood regarding her sibling rivalry.  It appeared that pt does have issues of poor self-esteem and family conflicts.  Psychotherapy may be helpful for pt in exploring and resolving some of these issues.  It was recommended to pt that she perhaps later seek psychotherapy to explore these issues.  [INFO PROVIDED BY APPLICANT.]

020124:	Chief of Naval Personnel recommended to the Secretary of the Navy Applicant be discharged with a honorable by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder and found unsuitable for continued military service.  The sole basis for separation  in this case is substandard performance, due to a diagnosed personality disorder.  The psychiatric evaluation was precipitated by a suicidal gesture in which LTJG N_ (Applicant), emotionally distressed, notified ship’s medical personnel that she had over-medicated with Tylenol and Motrin.  The mental health evaluation included a recommendation for expeditious separation.

020220:	Assistant Secretary of the Navy (M&RA) approved Applicant's discharge.

020301: 	Mental Health Evaluation:  Impression – PT does not appear to have a personality disorder and her past reactions were likely due to situational factors involving occupational and social problems.  Pt may have some negative personality traits but they are not significant compared to the occupational and social problems she was experiencing.  What this means is that her personality traits likely aggravated the situation that was already adverse in nature.  The patient is found psychologically fit for duty and returned to her command for duty.  In my professional opinion, LTjg N_ is suitable for continued military service and she should not be processed for an administrative discharge based on a mental health problem.  Clinical Psychologist.

020401:	CHNAVPERS directed Applicant’s discharge.  [EXTRACTED FROM THE APPLICANT’S DD FORM 214.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020531 with an honorable discharge for convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder (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).

Issue 1.  The documentation and statements provided by the Applicant were not sufficient to overturn the presumption that the Applicant was properly diagnosed with a personality disorder.  The Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by competent medical authority.  The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation was improper or inequitable.  Relief denied.

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6B (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 13 December 1999 until Present establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.

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