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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-AN, USN
Docket No. ND05-00940

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050510.  The Applicant requests the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “PREGNANCY”.  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 20051221.  After a thorough review of all available 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 reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain Honorable 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:

“Box 28 on my DD Form 214 currently reads “Personality Disorder”.  My grounding chit reads that my diagnosis was “Borderline Personality”.  I was pregnant at the time that I went and spoke to mental health about some concerns I had.  I had some problems with my superiors in my command who didn’t feel that I was making the right decisions regarding my marriage and subsequent pregnancy.  By the time I spoke to mental health, I was emotional and angry.  I felt the Navy that I had experienced wasn’t a thing that I wanted to raise a child in.  He asked me some questioned about my childhood, took some notes and then dismissed me back to my barracks.  My separation based on the diagnosis of “Borderline Personality Disorder” does not fit my character.  I plead to the board to review this separation narrative and correct it to “Pregnancy”.”

Applicant’s Remarks:  I have established myself in my community, and I have been married for seven years.  Two months ago, I found out that I could file this Request.  I ask the board of Review to please consider my age at that time and the fact that I didn’t know I could question the decisions of my superiors.  As a young airman in the Navy, I had no experience with the way things worked.  I had no sponsor or counselor to advise me on which action to take.  It is not my intention to question the education or Standing of the officer that diagnosed me with this psychoasis.  My intentions are only to have this narrative on my DD 214 Changed to the Reason that I was Requesting to be discharged, and that was for pregnancy.  I fear the current narrative will prevent my pursuit in the field of Law enforcement, so that I may further serve my community.  Thank you for your time + consideration.

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)
Grounding Notice dtd June 17, 1998
Certificate of Marriage
American Red Cross First Aid/CPR/AED Instructor Certificate (2)
Letter of Appreciation dtd March 5, 1998
Letter of Response from Applicant dtd November 27, 2005 (2 pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19970315 – 19971111		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19971112		Date of Discharge:  19980702

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00 07 21  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  none
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  17 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted:  4 (12 month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  64

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NA*		Behavior:  NA*	OTA:  NA*

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

* Not Available

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

980505:	Naval Hospital Pensacola, Mental Health Clinic evaluation.  
Diagnosis:  Personality disorder.  
Recommendation:  Strongly recommend Entry Level Separation based on personality disorder.  The patient has erratic moods and is likely to become and administrative burden.  Responsible for actions.
D_ A. B_ LT, MSC, Psychology Resident and C.F. W_ LCDR MC

980520:	Commanding Officer Naval Hospital Pensacola to Commanding Officer Naval Air Technical Training Center Pensacola.  Applicant diagnosed with borderline personality disorder.  Although not acutely suicidal, she is considered at risk of self harm and retention in the military is likely to engender an increasing risk of suicidal behavior.  Her potential for further useful service to the United States Navy is poor.  It is recommended that separation be effected on the basis of Entry Level Performance.

980520:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (diagnosed personality disorder).  Notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

980619:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government.

980619:	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.

980702:	Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Center, forwarded the administrative discharge package to CNP (PERS-254).  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “Airman M_ (Applicant) was diagnosed by medical authorities as having a borderline personality disorder which is virtually untreatable in a military facility.  Although not acutely suicidal, she is considered at risk of self-harm and retention in the military is likely to engender an increasing risk of suicidal behavior.  Her potential for further useful service to the United States Navy is considered poor.  Medical authorities strongly recommend that she be administratively separated.  In my opinion, she has no potential for future active service; therefore, I have directed that she be discharged from the naval service with the type of discharge warranted by the service record by reason of Convenience of the Government.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980702 by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of honorable.  After a thorough review of all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).  

Normally to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  By regulation, a member may be separated by reason of convenience of the government – personality disorder; when diagnosed by competent medical authority and the disorder is so severe that the member's ability to function effectively in the Naval environment is significantly impaired, and that the impairment interferes with the member's performance of duty, or poses a threat to their safety or well-being.  Competent medical authority diagnosed the applicant’s personality disorder, she was judged to represent a risk of harming herself and to be of limited potential for future useful service to the U. S. Navy.  The Board discovered no impropriety or inequity after a review of Applicant’s case.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends the narrative reason for her separation is inappropriate and should be “pregnancy”.  The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  To be eligible for a convenience of the government – pregnancy discharge the member must request discharge per Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-112, provide certification of pregnancy and demonstrate an inability to comply with the Navy’s family care requirement.  There is no evidence in the record nor has the Applicant provided documentation that these requirements were met.  The separation process was in strict compliance with the Reference (A).  The Applicant was diagnosed by competent medical authority and notified of her intended discharge by reason of convenience of the government – personality disorder, she elected not to consult counsel and elected to waive her rights.  No other narrative reason for separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged.  To change the narrative reason for separation would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The Applicant states that she is concerned her narrative reason for discharge could cause her difficulty in obtaining future employment.  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization based on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits.  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 purpose of enhancing medical, employment, housing or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  This issue is without merit.  Relief is not warranted.  

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 should be provided to the Board include evidence of a drug free life style, proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Applicant has provided her marriage license and American Red Cross instructor certification as documentation of her post service community involvement for the Board’s consideration.  The Board commends the Applicant’s personal achievements and recognized her service to the community, however after careful consideration, the Board concluded that the Applicant’s post-service achievements have been insufficient to mitigate her misconduct while in the Naval service.  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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to her 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 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 31 Aug 1998, 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.

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