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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-CTR3, USN
Docket No. ND05-01198

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050719.  The Applicant requested that his characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the narrative reason for separation be changed to “convenience of gov’t or proper narrative”.  The Applicant requested 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 20060209.  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 characterization 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:

“WRONGFULLY DIAGNOSED W/PERSONALITY DISORDER.  PROVED, THROUGH PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FROM THE MEDICAL COLLEG OF GEORGIA THAT THE DIAGNOSIS IS FALSE.  WISH TO REMOVE DEBT TO THE NAVY.  WAS INFORMED, BY PSD THAT ANY DEBT I OWED BY WAY OF REENLISTMENT, WAS DEEMED OUT DUE TO IT BEING A DISCHARGE THAT WAS A CONVIENANCE OF THE GOV’NT.  UPON RECEIPT OF MY CREDIT REPORT, I NOW OWE 18,000+.”

Applicant’s Remarks:  (Taken from the DD Form 293.)

“I SERVED THE NAVY WITH MY WHOLE HEART.  I WORKED AT NSA WITH A TOP SECRET CLEARANCE *IF I HAVE TO I WILL FINISH MY ENLISTMENT TO REMOVE THIS DEBT.  THANK YOU.”

Documentation

In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Letter to the Applicant from Board for Correction of Naval Records, dated November 23, 2004
Applicant’s DD Form 149
Psychological Testing Report from Medical College Georgia, (4 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19990920 - 199990927	COG
	Active:   USN	19990928 - 20021120	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20021121		Date of Discharge:  20031024

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00 11 04 		(04 00 27   Total Active Service)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  22

Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12+			AFQT:  69

Highest Rate:  CTR3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.5 (2)		Behavior:  3.0 (2)		OTA:  3.15 (2)

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal, First Navy Good Conduct Medal for Period ending 02SEP27

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: 

021121:	Reenlisted this date for a term of 6 years.

030910:	Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital Pensacola to Commanding Officer, CNC, Corry Station, Pensacola, Florida:  The Applicant was seen for a psychiatric evaluation on 08 and 10 September, 2003 wherein he was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depressed mood and personality disorder, with antisocial and borderline features.  Expeditious administrative separation is recommended based on a personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  The Applicant was considered a threat to harm himself or others if retained in the US Navy.

030912:	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 - personality disorder.

030912:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

031106:	Commanding Officer, Center for Cryptology, Corry Station, Pensacola, Florida notified Commander, Naval Personnel of the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government - personality disorder.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “Petty Officer B_(Applicant) reported to this command as a student on 16 June 2003.  Medical authorities at Naval Hospital, Pensacola evaluated Petty Officer B_(Applicant) on 8 and 10 September 2003 because of emotional and work performance problems.  He was found to have a severe personality disorder which rendered him unsuitable for further service in the Navy.  Furthermore, medical authorities determined that Petty Officer B_(Applicant) may be considered a threat to harm himself or other if retained in the Navy.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20031024 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 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).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

To permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has met the standard of acceptable conduct and performance, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A general (under than honorable conditions) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of his military record.  In the Applicant’s supporting documentation, there is evidence that suggests he deliberately exaggerated his condition in an effort to be discharged, as well as, emotional and work performance problems.  Furthermore, he admitted to conflicts with his superior officer, issues with aggression, anger management problems, and being argumentative.  Based on the evidence of record, coupled with the government’s presumption of regularity the Board concluded that the Applicant’s service was equitably characterized.  Relief denied.

The Applicant requested that his narrative reason for separation be changed to “convenience of gov’t or proper narrative”.  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.  The Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by competent medical authority. The NDRB presumed that despite the Applicant’s apparent attempts at deception, the diagnosis of personality disorder was proper.  The separation process was in strict compliance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-122.  The Applicant was properly notified of his intended discharge by reason of convenience of the government – personality disorder, he elected not to consult counsel and elected to waive his rights.  Reference (A) directs that Block 28 “Narrative Reason for Separation”, contain the words “Personality Disorder”.  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 also contends that he was wrongfully diagnosed with personality disorder.  In support of his contention, the Applicant submitted his own psychological test results to refute the diagnosis of personality disorder while on active duty.  Although the licensed psychologist concluded the Applicant’s testing was “not sufficient to support personality disorder” it also raised questions regarding the validity of the test results as a result of the Applicant’s test taking strategy and motivation.  The Board concluded this independent diagnosis was not conclusive enough to warrant a change of the Applicant’s narrative reason.  Relief denied.

The Applicant asked the NDRB to remove his debt of over $18,000 or allow him to finish his enlistment to remove the debt.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction and no authority over eliminating debt, reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces.  This does not merit relief.  

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 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, 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, 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