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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-FC3, USN
Docket No. ND05-00943

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050510.  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 20051221.  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:

“Discharge status was based solely on 1 evaluation at time of discharge without taking into account a documented history of exemplary service.  This resulted in an average of 3.2 vs. the 3.4 required for the Honorable Discharge.

Positive items for consideration:
- Obtained CC Boost from Great Lakes Boot Camp 1992
- Graduated 3rd in class for FC-A school 1992
- Was listed as 5th in class for FC-C school until time of Baby Leave.

All negative items accounted and explained to me against Military Bering at the time of the review were as follows with applicable comments:
- Negative Military Bering count for taking approved Baby Leave
- Negative Military Bering count for submitting a special request chit concerning the coloring of my hair
- Negative Military Bering count for 2 separate hospitals visits ultimately resulting in the discharge itself

Documentation

Only the service was reviewed.  The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19910326 - 19920101	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19920102		Date of Discharge:  19940204

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  01  03
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:	None
	Confinement:			None

Age at Entry:  19

Years Contracted:  4 (24 month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  87

Highest Rate:  FC3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.4 (1)			Behavior:  2.8 (1)		OTA:  3.15

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

931214:	Medical evaluation by Staff Psychiatrist.
Applicant diagnosed AXIS I:  Adjustment Disorder with mixed emotional features and AXIS II: Schizotypal Personality Disorder, provisional.  Administrative separation should be strongly considered.  

940107:	Medical evaluation by Mental Health Unit.
Applicant diagnosed AXIS I:  Adjustment Disorder with MDEC and Axis II:  Personality Disorder not otherwise specified with Borderline and Histrionic Traits.  
Disposition:  1.  Recommend admin separation via OPNAVINST 1910.1D ASAP, 2.  Is a future risk for harm to self if retained, 3.  Has severe character disorder; poor diagnosis if retained.

940118:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of personality disorder as evidenced by mental health evaluations of 14 December 1993 and 7 January 1994.  Applicant was notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is general (under honorable conditions).

940118:	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 and to submit a statement.

940216:	Commanding Officer, Combat Systems Technical Schools Command reported to CHNAVPERS that he discharged the Applicant with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of personality disorder.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “FC3 R_ (Applicant) has had a history of emotional disturbances and, at times, displayed poor immature judgement.  Just prior to his last hospitalization he stated that he thought he had killed someone and dumped their body into a local canal.  As a matter of caution, special agents of the Mare Island Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) were notified.  NCIS Special Agents conducted a search in the area identified by FC3 R_(Applicant).  The investigation produced negative results.  Pursuant to Article 3620225 of reference (a), a decision was made to separate the member due to his personality disorder and the ever increasing danger he presented to himself and others.  FC3 R_(Applicant) did not object to being separated and felt that it was in his best interest.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940204 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 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).

Under applicable regulations, separations based on a personality disorder should be honorable unless a general (under honorable conditions) or an entry-level separation is warranted.  A general discharge may be warranted if the Applicant’s service contains records of nonjudicial punishments, disciplinary actions, or if other significant negative aspects existed, which outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s period of service.  Additionally, a general discharge may be warranted if the Applicant’s performance evaluation averages are not sufficient to merit an honorable discharge.  The Applicant’s record contains no evidence of NJP or other disciplinary action, however the Applicant’s performance evaluation average, specifically his average of 2.8 in the category of Behavior, was sufficient to warrant a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  Based on the evidence of record, the Board could find no improprieties or inequities in the Applicant’s characterization of service.  Relief denied.

The Applicant implies that his poor military bearing rating was the result of taking approved baby leave, submitting a special request chit for hair color, and two separate hospital visits.  There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs.  This presumption permits the Board to presume that the government’s agents acted in good faith, proceeded within the bounds of the law, and conformed their behavior to appropriate standards during the Applicant’s Naval service and subsequent administrative processing.  The Applicant bears the burden of establishing his issues through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that his chain of command used any inappropriate information in determining his military bearing rating.  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 5, effective 
05 Mar 1993 until 21 Jul 1994, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

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, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.

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