ex-SN, USN
ND06-00968

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:  				20060711
Narrative Reason for Separation:			
Character of Service:				
Discharge Authority:				MILPERSMAN 1910-122     
Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge:	USS ROSS (DDG 71)     

Applicant’s Request:
	Narrative Reason change to: 		NONE REQUESTED     
	Characterization change to:		
	Review Requested:			
Representation:  					

Decision:

Date of Decision:					20070517
The Discharge shall remain:		               
						
Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:	
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:	
 (or BCD only) The Board found that clemency was: 	
Vote (characterization/reason)			/
Location of Board:				Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:				
Complete Medical Record:			
Discharge Package Complete:			

Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

Summary of Service:

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)				20011107-20020805
Active:   NONE		               		     
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  				20020806
Years Contracted:  				,        
Date of Discharge:				20050311
Length of Service:				02  Yrs  07  Mos  6  Days
Time Lost During This Period:			      

Education Level:  				
Age at this Enlistment:  				
AFQT:  						87
Highest Rate/Rank:				SN

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance/Behavior/OTA:			3.0 (1) 2.0 (1) 2.50     
	Extracted from:  Supporting Documents   Other:       

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214):
NAVY "E" RIBBON, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE RIBBON 

Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

20030619:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 92:  Failure to obey lawful general order or regulation.
	Article 110:  Improper hazarding of a vessel.
	Article 113:  Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $698 for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1 (suspended for 6 month).  Reduction in rate vacated 20040618.
   	No indication of appeal in the record.

20031127:	Administrative Counseling and Warning:  Failure to meet physical readiness test standards.  Applicant’s First Failure in most recent 4 year period.

20040203:	NJP for violation of UCMJ:
	Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
 	Awarded 25 days restriction and extra duty, reduction in rate to next inferior pay grade (suspended for six months).  Per C.O. ltr of 20050308.

20040203:	Most recent NAVPERS 1070/613 warning.
	[Extracted from Commanding Officer letter dated 20050308.]

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

20040123:	NMCP Initial Psychiatric Evaluation:  Applicant reported since being on the ship he has been depressed.  He reported that he felt empty much of the time.  He also has some issues with abandonment.  He reported fast driving whenever he could, fighting, stealing and truancy in school.  There is also a history of fire setting.  He also reports suicidal ideation with a plan.  He did not act on the plan.
 
20050209:	NMCP Emergency Department.  This 20 year old male presents in the aftermath of developing thoughts of self-harm that have resolved and were distressing to him.  His past and recent history certainly confirms the presence of strong character and personality attributes that are consistent with the “B” Cluster and have risen to the level of clinical significant and impairment in his personal and occupational life that warrant a diagnosis of a Personality Disorder.  He is not currently suicidal, homicidal, overtly psychotic, or manic.  When offered the opportunity for admission for the prevention of self-harm, he declines, and he does not currently meet criteria for detainment.  He is felt to be at low risk for suicide in the near term in light of the egodystonic nature of his thoughts, his strong support of and love for his mother, and his future career goals, as well as the close follow-up he has scheduled both with NMCP Psychiatry and with his counselor at the Fleet & Family Support Center. 
	Diagnosis:
	AXIS I:  Nicotine Dependence.
	AXIS II:  Personality Disorder Not-Otherwise Specified with Borderline, Antisocial, Histrionic, and Narcissistic Features.
	AXIS III:  Frequent upper respiratory infections.
	AXIS IV:  Financial strain, routine military stressors.
	AXIS V:  GAF of 62 currently, 65 in January 2004.
	Recommendation:  Administrative separation for unsuitability in accordance with MILPERSMAN 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).

20050210:	NMCP Doctors Progress Note:  Applicant was referred by IDC for another psychiatric evaluation due to recent self mutilation and suicidal ideations.  The diagnosis of personality disorder is consistent with the recommendation for administrative separation being repeated.  
	Diagnosis:
	Personality Disorder NOS, with recent self destructive crisis and suicidal ideation now resolved.  Highly recommended his command proceed with administrative separation or justify reasons for retaining the Applicant.  
	Applicant is psychiatrically fit for full duty and responsible.
	Applicant was given sertraline for depression.  It was noted that this treatment will not change the underlying disorder.

Elements of Discharge:  [INVOLUNTARY]

Discharge Process:				NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE
Date Notified:					20050216     
Reason for Discharge		  due to:  
				
Least Favorable Characterization:			
Record Supports Narrative Reason:			
Date Applicant Responded to Notification:		20050217
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel			
Administrative Board			
Obtain Copies	  			
Submit Statement(s) (date)			       
GCMCA Review				

Administrative Board Date:			NOT APPLICABLE
							
Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date):	NOT APPLICABLE
Separation Authority (date):	COMMANDING OFFICER, USS ROSS (20050308)
Narrative reason directed:				
Characterization directed:	
Date Applicant Discharged:			20050311

Additional Information Considered by Board

Type of documentation submitted by the Applicant and considered by the Board
       
       	Document Type					#Pages
       Related to Period of Service:
	Service/Medical Record:				1
	Other Period of Service:				0
       Related to Post-Service Period:
	Community Service:				0
	Education:					0
	Employment:					0
	Health/Medical:					0
	Character Statements:				0
	Criminal Records Checks:				0
	Additional Statements from Applicant:		0
        Other Documentation	 (Describe Below)		0

        Total Number of Pages:				1

       Description of Other Documentation:  None 

Applicant’s Issues (as summarized by the Board):
1.  Equity: Quality of Service.
2.  Equity: Applicant would like to become eligible for the Montgomery G.I. Bill

Decisional Issues:
The Board accepted Issue(s) 1 for consideration.  

Issue 1: (Equity).  The Applicant claims his discharge was for mental health issues and not related to any misconduct.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A general discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (Unauthorized absence), 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order), 110 (Improper hazarding of a vessel) and 113 (Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout). For the edification of the Applicant, Articles 92, 110 and 113 are considered serious offenses and could result in a punitive discharge if convicted at a general or special courts-martial.   The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and fall short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

Regarding the Applicant’s Issue 2, the Board determined that this issue is not one which can form the basis of relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding this Issue.  

There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of Government affairs.  This presumption will be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.  It must be noted that competent medical authority highly recommended the Applicant be administratively separated based on personality disorder with self destructive crisis and suicidal ideations unless a justifiable reason was given for retaining the Applicant. Since there was no credible evidence presented justifying retaining the Applicant it is presumed the Applicant was properly processed and discharged.

Minority Opinion

None.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until 19 June 2005, 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 II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity.

C.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (Failure to obey lawful order), 110 (Improper hazarding of a vessel) and 113 (Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout).

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil”.

Additional Reviews:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the 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 additional evidence related to this discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/ Educational Opportunities:  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

Reenlistment/ RE-code:  Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  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.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct:  DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record.  Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD.”  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades -  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 may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  

Board Membership:  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  20374-502