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

ex-RM3, USN 
Docket No. ND04-00613

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040302.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests 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 20041022.  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 was discovered by the NDRB.  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 3620200.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I believe my discharge was inequitable due to an isolated incident where I was consuming alcohol on base underage.  After this incident I was transferred to COMSUBGROUP 9 where I was not given an opportunity to continue in the submarine service.  My service up till this incident I believe was excellent.”

Documentation

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

Applicant letter, dated March 30, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	910130 - 910812	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910813		Date of Discharge:  940114

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  05  02
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4 (24 month extension)

Education Level:  11			AFQT:  66

Highest Rate:  RM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  *NMA	Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  NDSM

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No marks available in record

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

930309:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Violation of lawful written order; violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300 per month for 1 month, restriction for 30 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (Forfeiture and reduction in rate suspended for six months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

930323:	Applicant permanently decertified for duty under the Personnel Reliability Program.

940105:	Medical Evaluation:  Member is fit for duty, but manifests a long standing dependant personality disorder of such severity as to render him unsuitable for further Navy service.  He is fit for return to duty for processing for administrative separation initiated by his command.  

940107:	Medical Evaluation:  Member was found to be responsible for his actions and accountable for his behavior, not suffering a mental illness, does not need hospitalization or treatment.  He was found to be not currently a risk for suicide.  

Impression:  Personality disorder of such severity as to render member unsuitable for further Navy service.  Recommend administrative separation as soon as possible. 

No discharge package available

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940114 with a 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 and B).  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).  The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (E).

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 a competent medical authority on 940107.  The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation was improper or inequitable.  Relief denied.

A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion for violations of Articles 92 and 134 of the UCMJ.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  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 civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate his misconduct sufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.   

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 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 5, effective  05 Mar 1993 until 21 Jul 1994, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT. 

B.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 5, effective 930305 - 940721), Article 3620225, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THE BASIS OF PERSONALITY DISORDER.

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.  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.  

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