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

  ex-ATAN, USN
Docket No. ND04-01226

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040729.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050304.  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 1910-122 (formerly 3620225).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I was under a doctor’s care when I was separated …discharged.  The day I found out I made AT3 – 3rd class petty officer – E4 – was the day the doctor told me I was to be discharged.  I had 4.0 Evals & received all qualifications in a timely manner.  My Navy doctor (psychiatrist) was supposed to go over the affects meds were having w/ me – would get into conversations about his son’s sexuality/sexual prime.  This had nothing to do w/me!  He told me I’d commit suicide w/i a year, had me take my medical record w/ me & said I needed immediate VA assistance.  He discharged me with a medical condition, but gave me General – I served my country a whole lot better than that.  Lots of people in my squadron were discharged for use of drugs – which I never had a problem w/.  I am an honorable person and I served my country honorably.  I am proud of the time I spent, even if I am unable to repeat.  I feel like I was just tossed out by this doctor – he told my Commanding Officer that I would commit suicide & he would lose his job.  A great way to promote the Navy, I think.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	970130 - 970302	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970303		Date of Discharge:  990609

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  03  07
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  68

Highest Rate:  ATAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*			Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Marksman M-16 Ribbon

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No marks found in service record

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990426:	Applicant diagnosed Axis I: Major Depression, Moderately Severe, Recurrent, w/o Psychosis, Axis II: features of borderline/dependent personality, PD NOS.  Recommend follow-up consultation.

990507:	Admitted to Cedar Vista as a result of attempted suicide by overdose of Zoloft.  Doctor recommended she continue treatment for several more days due to the fact she was extremely lethal at the time she was admitted to the hospital with a recent suicide attempt as well as a suicide plan with intent to act upon which was quite potentially lethal.

990513:	Applicant diagnosed Axis I: Major Depression, Moderately Severe, Recurrent, w/o Psychosis, Axis II: features of borderline/dependent personality, PD NOS.  Recommend outpatient cognitive-behavior therapy for depression, more psychodynamic insight-oriented approach to issues of abuse and victimization in childhood and adolescence.  Attempt some reconstructive emphasis upon adaptive coping strategies, monitor for suicidality.  Ongoing psychiatric medication management.

990528:	Applicant brought in via ambulance because of suicide attempt by wrist slashing.  Applicant combative and needed to be restrained to gurney.  Applicant found to be a danger to herself.

990609:	DD-214:  Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a personality disorder.

Complete discharge package unavailable

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990609 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).  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 (B and C).  The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (D).

Issue 1:  Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  The Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by a competent medical authority on 990426 and again on 990513.  At least once, on 990528, she was determined to be a danger to herself.  During this time period, the evidence of record also reveals the Applicant twice attempted suicide.  As such, the evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis of personality disorder and subsequent administrative separation was improper or inequitable.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends she served her country honorable and thus deserves an honorable discharge.  A general discharge is warranted for behavior not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs.  The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support her issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that her service warranted an honorable discharge.  The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.  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.  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 24, effective 
20 May 99 until 26 March 2000, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225), Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder. 

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, 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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023