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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-GMSA, USN
Docket No. ND05-00773

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050405.  The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050915.  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 and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I AM LOOKING TO FURTHER ADVANCE MYSELF IN MY CAREER IN CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT, HOWEVER, I CAN NOT DO SO WITH CERTAIN AGENCIES WITHOUT A HONORABLE DISCHARGE.

AT THE TIME OF MY SERVICE, I WAS GOING THROUGH A DIVORCE (INITIATED BY SPOUSE) AND I HAD A HARD TIME DEALING WITH IT AND I WAS NOT ABLE TO ADEQUATELY SERVE THE NAVY AND WISHED TO BE DISCHARGED.  I SERVED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER PRIOR TO ENTERING THE U.S. NAVY AND AT THAT TIME, I WISHED TO RETURN HOME TO FURTHER MY CAREER IN CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT RATHER THAN STAY IN THE MILITARY.  IN NO WAY AM I TRYING TO IMPLY THAT I DID NOT ENJOY SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES AND THAT I AM ONLY STATING THAT MY SERVICE TO THE NAVY WAS NOT AT THE BEST OF MY ABILITY DUE TO THE PERSONAL PROBLEMS I WAS HAVING AT THE TIME.  THANK YOU.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Statement from Applicant, dated August 6, 2005 (2 pages)
MILPERSMAN 1910-402
Service Record Documents (3 pages)
Letter of appreciation, dated December 31, 2001
Letter from The State Senate to Applicant, dated May 16, 2002
Newspaper clipping, undated
Promotion notification from Waynesboro Police Department, dated March 11, 2004
Performance review for January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004, unsigned
Letter of appreciation, dated June 28, 2005
Certificate from Georgia Bureau of Investigation, Division of Forensic Sciences, dated June 21, 2004
Certificate of completion, dated December 8, 2003
Certificate of completion, dated November 11, 2004
Certificate of completion, dated June 5, 2003
Certificate of completion, dated June 10, 2005
Certificate of completion, dated February 28, 2003
Certificate of completion, dated May 21, 2002
Certificate of training, dated March 2, 2005
Certificate of completion, dated September 1, 2004
Certificate of completion, dated October 21, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20000415 - 20000530	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20000531		Date of Discharge:  20011005

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  04  05
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:	None
	Confinement:			None

Age at Entry:  21

Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  61

Highest Rate:  GMSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.00 (1)			Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  2.17

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  None

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

010925:	Medical evaluation by Naval Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry, Portsmouth, VA:
Applicant diagnosed with personality disorder.  The psychiatrist strongly recommended expeditious separation based on a personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  Applicant was considered self-destructive and a continuing risk of harm to self or others.  [Extracted from supporting documents provided by the Applicant.]

010925:	Applicant contracted for safety.

011005:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of convenience of the government-personality disorder.  Applicant notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is general (under honorable conditions).  [Extracted from supporting documents provided by the Applicant.]

011005:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.  [Extracted from supporting documents provided by the Applicant.]

011005:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of personality disorder, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122.

Service Record contains a partial Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20011005 by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions).  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 Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

For discharges based on personality disorder, the discharge should be honorable unless there exists justification for a general (under honorable conditions), under other than honorable conditions, or entry level separation characterization.  A review of Applicant’s record indicates that a general (under honorable conditions) discharge is justified.  The Applicant’s average overall performance and behavior marks were 2.17.  The minimum average overall marks required to ensure an honorable discharge are 2.50 or higher.  As such, the Board could find no impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s characterization of service based upon a review of his service record.  Relief denied.

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 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 could 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 Board received and considered all of the Applicant’s submissions, including his letters of appreciation, records of promotion, certificates of completion, and service record documents.  After careful consideration, the Board concluded the Applicant’s post-service achievements have been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by his failing marriage.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that many servicemembers face hardships similar to those of the Applicant.  It must further be noted that most members of the Navy still serve honorably despite their hardships and therefore earn their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized.  Relief denied.

There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of enhancing employment opportunities and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the 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 any additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related 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.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 33, effective 
14 Aug 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225), Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s).

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