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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-RMSA, USN
Docket No. ND05-00718

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050321.  The Applicant requests the removal of personality disorder from Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, of his DD Form 214.  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 20050811.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, an impropriety in the Applicant’s Narrative Reason for Separation was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the Narrative Reason for Separation shall change.  The discharge shall change to:  HONORABLE/SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-164.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I am requesting that my reason for separation-currently personality disorder, be removed and that my reentry code be upgraded from RE-4 to RE-1, because of misdiagnosis while in service, and because I wish to join the United States Marine Corps.

To whom it may concern:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing this letter because of my desire to become eligible for reenlistment in the armed forces.  In order to do this I must have my record cleared of the current reason for separation and I must have my reenlistment code upgraded.

I joined the Navy when I was 19 years old and fulfilled all of my responsibilities during basic training and 14 weeks in Radioman “A” School.  Subsequently I was stationed aboard the USS Fife (DD-991) in Yokosuka, Japan.  At that time my family was going though a very difficult period, my parents were divorcing and my younger sister was having personal difficulties.  I was very torn and emotionally upset, being away from my home and family and in a foreign country.  I realize now that I was very young and inexperienced in life and I allowed these conditions to affect my better judgment.  At the time I thought it was better to be labeled as having a mental disorder than to stay in a place where I could not be close to my family and help them.  That was a mistake.  I now realize that I was not able to do anymore for my family than I could have done from a distance and that I sacrificed my military service and career over something I had no power to affect in the first place.

In the years since my discharge I have worked in numerous types of jobs, the most rewarding of which has been public service and security work.  The most meaningful of these jobs was working at the International Border (San Ysidro Port of Entry) as an Armed GSA Contract Guard.  While doing this type of work I realized how much I enjoyed working as a member of a team, providing security and enforcing laws.  This also made me realize that I am better suited for working within an organization such as the military because I have a great deal of appreciation for structure, order and rules.  I am now six years older than I was when I was discharged from the Navy, and in that time I have learned a great deal about life and responsibility, as well as who I am, what I want, and why I want it.  I know that now I am ready to reenter the military and serve my country the way that I wanted to when I was 19 years old.  My life experiences have made me more prepared to do the job that is expected of me.  I am much more mature, focused and determined.  I know that I will do a much better job now than I ever could have then.

It is for this reason that I am asking for your consideration of my request to expunge my military record of any and all references that would make it not possible for me to reenlist in the Armed Forces of the United States of America.  At this point in time I want, more than anything else, to serve my country and to fulfill my desire to belong to a proud military organization.  Thank you for your consideration and your assistance.

Sincerely, S_ L_ (Applicant)
[signed]
(phone number deleted)”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Letter from a board certified psychiatrist, dated June 23, 2004
Character reference, dated October 6, 2004
NCO Creed
Letter of recommendation, dated September 27, 2004
Letter of recommendation, dated October 25, 2004
Character reference, dated, September 21, 2004
Three pictures of Applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	960905 - 970302	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970303		Date of Discharge:  980114

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  10  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  65

Highest Rate:  RMSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.00 (1)		Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  2.33

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

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:

971219:	Applicant diagnosed Axis I:  Relational Problems Not Otherwise Specified, Axis II:  Borderline Personality Disorder.  The psychiatrist recommended administrative separation based per MILPERSMAN 3620225 due to personality disorder.  Applicant was considered competent and responsible for his behavior.  Applicant considered not dangerous to self or others, no psychotic symptoms.

971219:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of convenience of the government – personality disorder, as evidenced by certified medical authority diagnosis that the Applicant was potentially harmful to himself or others.  Applicant notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is general (under honorable conditions).

971219:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

971220:	Commanding Officer, USS Fife (DD 991), directed the Applicant’s discharge with an honorable by reason of convenience of the government – personality disorder.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): “Member is being administratively processed for separation by reason of Convenience of the Government – Personality Disorder.  RMSR L_ (Applicant) was diagnosed as having a personality disorder and determined to be a danger to himself if he remains in a shipboard environment by LT O_, a certified medical authority.  I agree with this recommendation and am therefore separating RMSR L_ (Applicant) from the Naval Service with an Honorable characterization.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980114 with an honorable 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 records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the Applicant’s Narrative Reason for Separation was improper (B).

Under applicable regulations, a servicemember may be separated by reason of convenience of the government – personality disorder only after a Page 13 counseling/retention warning has been violated.  There is, however, one exception to this rule.  If a servicemember is also diagnosed by competent mental health professional as a danger to himself or others, the requirement for a Page 13 counseling/retention warning does not apply.  A careful review of the Applicant’s service record indicates that, based on the Commanding Officer’s letter, the Applicant was never issued a Page 13 counseling/retention warning.  Furthermore, the medical record reveals no instance where the Applicant was specifically diagnosed as a danger to himself or others.  In fact, as the Applicant was being discharged from the U.S. Naval Hospital, Yokosuka, Mental Health department, his final progress note was listed as “Pt competent and responsible for own behavior.  Not dangerous to self/others.  No psychotic symptoms.”  Although there is ample evidence in the Applicant’s case for a reasonable person to conclude that he was in fact a danger to himself or others, the medical record does not contain that explicit diagnosis.   Without the diagnosis of “danger to himself or others”, regulations require that the Applicant be given an opportunity to correct his behavior through the issuance of a Page 13 counseling/retention warning.  The failure to issue the Applicant the required counseling coupled with his subsequent administrative discharge on the basis of convenience of the government – personality disorder, constitutes error.  The Board concluded unanimously that relief is in order and as such, the Applicant’s narrative reason for separation shall be changed to:  “Secretarial Authority.”  Relief granted.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  The NDRB has no authority to provide  additional relief in this case.  The Applicant may, however, petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100, concerning a change in the characterization of naval service, if he desires further review of his case.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 31 Aug 1998, 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.

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