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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND05-01367 

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050818.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Omaha, NE.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington DC at the Washington Navy Yard.  The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060414.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the characterization of discharge shall change to:  Honorable. The Board’s vote was 4 to 1 that the reason for discharge shall not change. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter:

“Dear Sirs and Mama’s,

I would first like to thank the board for taking the time to review my case.  I know that you are very busy and will get right to the point.  What I am asking is to have my re-enlistment code change so that I may rejoin military service.  I know that you will review my military records but I also know that there is information that is not or may not be in my service records and that is the purpose of this letter.  First, when I enlisted in the Navy I had great ambitions and goals for my personal life with the Navy and like all young people would do anything to reach those goals.  After I several weeks in basic training I found out that I was not eligible for the programs that I had planed to try out for due to physical limitations beyond my own control.  More specifically I wear corrective lenses in order to see.  Interestingly enough I wasn’t told about this disqualification when I was speaking with a Naval Recruiter, so need less to say I felt a little betrayed and very much so hurt.  As I’m sure that my service records show.  I was discharged because at the time I stated that I was having thoughts of hurting myself, because I felt that there was no other way out of the situation.  I will also like to inform the board that I was married at that time to a woman who was very persuasive, controlling, and emotionally abusive.  One year after I was discharged I found out that my wife at that time was diagnosed with Bi-Polar Illness.  I am no longer married to her.  The reason why I am stating these things in this letter is to show the board that I am nothing like I was then.  I now am living a very happy life working in the communications industry.  I am also older and much wiser then I was back then about who I am and what I want out of life.  I would also like to inform the board that in my sixth week of basic training I was hospitalized for one week due to Sinusitis and was to be sent back in training two weeks in order to appropriately finish basic training.  Instead of graduating two weeks behind my original division of 499, I graduated just twelve hours behind with division 506.  I inform the board of this because I want to show the board that I was a highly motivated sailor and wasn’t afraid of stepping up to the plate to get the job done.  The rest of the important information regarding this case should be in my service records.  Once again, I would like to thank the board for taking the time to review my records.  I hope to hear from someone shortly.

Sincerely,
[signed]
T_ E.  G_(Applicant)”

Documentation

Only the service record 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)	19970227 - 19970915	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19970916		Date of Discharge:  19980507

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  22
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  18

Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  59

Highest Rate:  FR

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):

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

970227:	Pre-service waiver for law violations of serious offenses granted.  [Extracted from DD Form 1966/1.]

980311:	Medical evaluation by P_ S_, Psychology Staff, Mental Health Department, Naval Hospital, Great Lakes, IL.
Applicant diagnosed with AXIS: Dysthymia, primary type early onset, adjustment disorder with depressed mood.  AXIS II:  Avoidant personality disorder with borderline features.  The psychiatrist recommended 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 a continuing risk of harm to self or others.

980326:	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 on the basis of a personality disorder as evidenced by your chronological record of medical care.

980326:	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.

980406:	Commanding Officer, Service School Command, Great Lakes, IL directed discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a personality disorder.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “Enclosure (1) through (3) support subject administrative separation action.  FR G_(Applicant) was referred to the Mental Health Unit, Naval Hospital, Great Lakes for observation and evaluation due to failing to adapt, chronic depression and a personality disorder.  FR G_(Applicant) has a long history of untreated depression and the clinical psychologist predicts that he will continue to have future depression episodes which would be very costly and time consuming for the Navy to treat.  I concur with the psychological evaluation and recommendation that FR G_(Applicant) should be separated from the naval service.  Pursuant to reference (a), I direct Personnel Support Activity, Great Lakes separate FR G_(Applicant) from the naval service with a discharge characterized as General Under Honorable Conditions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980507 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 but inequitable (B and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

In the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should be Honorable unless General (Under Honorable Conditions) is warranted. Upon review of the Applicant’s service record, the Board found no negative aspects of the member’s conduct that would warrant a General discharge. Upgrade to an Honorable characterization of service is warranted. Therefore, relief granted.

The NDRB did note a technical issue in the Applicant’s separation processing.  The effective version of reference (A) contained a typographical error that required a counseling/warning statement for personnel being processed for separation due to personality disorders even if they were determined to be a danger to themselves or others. This typographical error was included in the effective instruction from 19971212 until 19980831 but did not represent the Navy’s policy at that or any time. The record indicates that separation was recommended by the Commanding Officer and no counseling/warning was issued. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Board presumed that the command acted in accordance with the Navy’s policy. Regularity is presumed in that the command was able to determine the correct policy in spite of the typographical error in the instruction and therefore acted properly. The Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by a competent medical authority on 19980311 and determined to be a danger to himself or others.  The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation were improper or inequitable. No change to the narrative reason for separation is warranted.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

While the Applicant did not request a change of the narrative reason for discharge, the NDRB did consider the propriety of the narrative reason for discharge as detailed above. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100, concerning relief in this matter. The Applicant also 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 evidence related to this 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 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.

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