ex-GSMFR, USN
ND06-01185

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:  				20060908
Characterization of Service:			
Narrative Reason for Separation:			OTHER PHYSICAL/MENTAL CONDITIONS-PERSONALITY DISORDERS
Discharge Authority:				MILPERSMAN 3620200
Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge:	USS O’BANNON (DD 987)	     

Applicant’s Request:	
	Characterization change to:		
	Narrative Reason change to: 		
	Review Requested:			
	Representation:				

Decision:

Date of Decision:					20070628
Location of Board:				Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:				
Complete Medical Record:			YES
Complete Discharge Package:			

Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:	
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:	

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL).	
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  OTHER PHYSICAL/MENTAL CONDITIONS-.

Summary of Service:

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)				19910605 - 19910623  
Active:   					       

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  				19910624				     
Years Contracted:  				4;        
Date of Discharge:				19930625				     
Length of Service
	Active:					02 Yrs   00  Mths   01  Dys  (does not exclude lost time)
	
Time Lost During This Period:			  	

Education Level:  				
Age at this Enlistment:  				
AFQT:  						53
Highest Rate/Rank:				     

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
						Performance: 3.5(2) Behavior: 3.2(2) OTA: 3.5

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal, Battle Efficiency Ribbon     

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

19930201:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 107: Signing official documents known to be false.  
	Article 134: Wrongfully altering a military ID card. 
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.
	No indication of appeal in the record.

19930203:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Signing official documents that were known to be false; wrongfully altering a military ID card), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning	

19930320:	Applicant to UA at 0745.

19930320:	Applicant from UA at 1400 (surrendered).  Applicant UA for 7 hours 15 minutes.

19930604:	NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
	Article 92: Knowledge of lawful order, to turn over lost I. D. card, fail to obey by wrongfully holding previously lost I.D. card. 
	Article 134: Wrongfully communicate a threat to wit: “You’d better watch your back 24 hours a day, because your going down.” 
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 45 days.

19930803:	BUPERS message to USS O’BANNON.  Notified the command that the Applicant should have been processed for all reasons for which he met the criteria for administrative separation.  The Applicant met criteria for administrative separation due to commission of a serious offense in addition to personality disorder.  BUPERS message intended to assist the command in future processing.  No further action required in this case.

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

19930521:	Mental Health Clinic.  Reason for request: suicidal thoughts, suicide ideation, plans – to jump off dry dock.
		Provisional Diagnosis:  situational anxiety, depression, adjustment disorder.
		Consultation Report Diagnosis:
		I Occupational Problem R/O Adjustment D/O, R/O MDE.
		II Immature and Avoidant Traits.
		III None.
		Plan: Fit  for duty.  Applicant strongly denies SI, HI.

19930609:	Referral to ARS.  Reason for request is possible alcohol abuse.  Provisional diagnosis alcohol abuse.

19930610:	Consultation Report.  Impression is alcohol abuse.  Recommendation is Level I (NADSAP) to be arranged through the Command DAPA.

19930611:	Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital, Charleston.  Subject member (Applicant) was admitted to Naval Hospital Charleston for treatment on 19930608 and discharged from this facility on 19930611.  

19930611:	Clinical Psychologist Head, Mental Health Department.  Notifies CO, USS O’ BANNON that Applicant has been diagnosed with; (1) Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified; (2) Alcohol Abuse.  Disposition is full duty with outpatient follow-up on 19930617 and 19930623.  Diagnosis: Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified.  Recommendation: Expeditious administrative separation.  Comments of Attending Medical Officer:  “FN J_ L. S_ is competent and accountable for his/her actions.  However, this service member has a personality disorder of such severity that he/she is unsuitable for further military service.  If retained on active duty and stressed by routine military demands, he/she may engage in behaviors which endanger his/her life or the lives of others.  Prognosis for successful completion of his/her enlistment is poor.  It is strongly recommended that an expeditious administrative separation be carried out in accordance with NAVMILPERSCOM Instruction 1910.d and CINCLANTFLT Message 161618Z (Oct 1989). 

Elements of Discharge:  [INVOLUNTARY]

Discharge Process:				
Date Notified:					19930614
Reason for Discharge		  due to:  
				
Least Favorable Characterization Authorized:	

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:		19930614
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel			
Administrative Board			
Obtain Copies	  			
Submit Statement(s) (date)			       
GCMCA Review				

Commanding Officer Recommendation :		 
Separation Authority (date):	CO, USS O'BANNON (19930625)
	Narrative reason directed:			
	Characterization directed:			
Date Applicant Discharged:			19930625

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 Under Review:
	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

Applicant’s Issues as Summarized by the Board:

1.  The Applicant states that he was told that he received a General discharge because he had not served his entire enlistment contract and that he could get an upgrade to Honorable.
  
2.  Applicant states that he did not realize that a General discharge could affect his employment opportunities.  

Issue 2:    which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or  the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .  

Decisional Issues:     

 Issue 1 ().  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 a retention warning and 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 92, 107 and 134 of the UCMJ.  Violations of UCMJ Articles 92, 107 and 134 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a special or general court 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 falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

On 19930803 BUPERS notified the USS O’BANNON that the Applicant should have been dual processed for both personality disorder and commission of a serious offense.  In accordance with regulation, when separation processing is warranted for any reason in addition to personality disorder (convenience of the government), dual or multiple processing is required.  If the Applicant had been properly notified, the least favorable characterization of service would have been Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.   In this case the error of procedure was not prejudicial to the rights of the Applicant, therefore the Board determined that the discharge was proper and equitable.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs 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.

Minority Opinion

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5, effective 5 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, 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 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 order, regulation), 107 (False official statements), and 134 (False or unauthorized pass offenses: Possessing or using with intent to defraud or deceive, or making, altering, counterfeiting, tampering with, or selling), and 134 (Threat, communicating).

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  20374-5023