ex-STGSR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100507
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	
	Narrative Reason change to:	HARDSHIP

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	USNR (DEP)	19971120 - 19980120  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  19980121	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  19981120	Highest Rank/Rate:  STGSR
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   00 Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  90
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  NFIR	Behavior:  NFIR	OTA:  NFIR

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	NONE

Periods of UA/CONF:  	NJP:  	SCM:  	SPCM:  	    CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 19980122:	For failure to disclose required basic enlistment eligibility information: pre-service marijuana use (x1).  Program waiver granted on 19980122 for enlistment into STG program.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed
Related to Military Service:
	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	

Related to Post-Service Period:
	Employment:		Finances:		Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Rehabilitation/Treatment:		Criminal Records:	
	Personal Documentation:		Community Service:		References:	
	Department of VA letter:		Other Documentation:	
		Additional Statements:
	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 21, effective 1 September 1998 until 
19 May 99, Article 1910-122, 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.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	Decisional issues: (1) The Applicant contends that his characterization of service at discharge was inequitable based on his documented overall performance and conduct while in the Navy.  (2) The Applicant contends that he did not suffer from a Personality Disorder.  (3) The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper and that a narrative reason for discharge of “Hardship” was the more appropriate reason for separation.

Decision

Date:  20110804 	            	Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  .

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  In reviewing discharges, the NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Applicant identified three specific issues for consideration by the NDRB; additionally, the NDRB conducted a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service reflects having received one NAVPERS 1070/613 retention-counseling warning and no judicial or nonjudicial disciplinary actions for any violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  

The Applicant’s record of service and medical records document that appropriately credentialed mental health care providers diagnosed him with both an Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood and a Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (severe).  The Applicant was determined to be unsuitable for military service as the Personality Disorder was sufficiently severe enough to impair significantly the member’s ability to function effectively in the military environment and his global assessment of functionality was determined to be dysfunctional and intrapsychically distressed with a recent suicide attempt.  The Applicant’s disorder was considered to not be amenable to effective treatment in the military setting.  It was further determined that, if retained, the Applicant was considered to present a risk for deterioration in functioning and a continuing danger to himself or others.  The Applicant was determined to be responsible for his actions and that he be held accountable, as required.  

On 29 October 1998, the Applicant was recommend for an expeditious administrative separation from the Naval Service by an appropriately credentialed mental health care provider.  On 03 November 1998, the Applicant was notified in writing of the command’s proposed recommendation for separation.  The basis of discharge was evidenced by the Applicant’s psychiatric evaluations dated 15, 21, and 28 October 1998.  The Applicant was further notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible was General (Under Honorable Conditions).  The NDRB reviewed the Applicant’s discharge recommendation; when notified of pending separation proceedings, the Applicant waived his right to consult with qualified legal counsel.  He further waived his right to submit written matters for consideration by the Separation Authority or to request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.  Due to the proposed characterization of service and length of service, the Applicant did not warrant an administrative discharge hearing board.  On 06 November 1998, the Applicant was directed to be discharged from the Naval Service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service based on a personality disorder of such severity as to render the member incapable of serving adequately in military service, in any capacity, in accordance with Article 1910-122 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN).  The Applicant provided no additional documentation to challenge or refute the narrative reason for separation, but provided a detailed statement outlining his recollection of events as mitigating factors that he believes refute the less than fully honorable characterization of his service at discharge.

Decisional Issues (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends that his characterization of service at discharge was inequitable based on his documented overall performance and conduct while in the Navy.  Per the MILPERSMAN, discharges based on personality disorder should be Honorable, unless there exists justification for a General 

(Under Honorable Conditions).  An Honorable discharge is warranted when the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel.  A General (Under Honorable Conditions) is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs the positive aspects of the member’s military record.  The Applicant’s record of service documents numerous incidents of undisclosed pre-service, disqualifying factors that were not revealed to the service during his enlistment to include failure to disclose his pre-service drug use and failure to identify pre-service suicidal gestures and attempts with a life long history of rapid mood swings.  Both of these were determined to be significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct that did outweigh the positive aspects of the Applicant’s 10 months of active duty service.  Accordingly, the NDRB unanimously agreed that that the Applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) was equitable.  Relief denied.

Decisional Issues (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends that he did not suffer from a Personality Disorder.  The Applicant was diagnosed, by a qualified mental health professional, as possessing a long-standing disorder of character and behavior of such severity as to interfere with serving adequately in the Navy.  He was considered a continuing risk to do harm to himself or others.  Based on family history, his recent suicidal attempt, and hospitalization, coupled with a history (unrevealed at enlistment) of suicidal ideations and gestures, the mental health professionals recommended an expeditious separation and waiver of the retention counseling requirement.  The Applicant’s DD Form 214, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, indicates that he was separated for a Personality Disorder.  The NDRB determined that no other Narrative Reason for Separation more accurately describes why the Applicant was discharged; to change the narrative reason for separation would be inappropriate.  Accordingly, relief denied.  

Decisional Issues (Propriety) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper and that a narrative reason for discharge of “Hardship” was the more appropriate reason for separation.  For discharges based on a severe hardship, the hardship must be a situation not normally encountered and resolved by other members of the naval service.
The hardship must affect the servicemember’s immediate family.  Additionally, the hardship must not be of a temporary nature and cannot reasonably be expected to be resolved within the near time-frame by using leave or a period of temporary duty for humanitarian reasons to better the situation.  Moreover, the Applicant must have made every reasonable effort to alleviate the hardship and there must be no other family nearby who are capable of providing the necessary assistance.  Finally, discharge must result in elimination or material alleviation of the hardship.  The NDRB found no evidence in the service records, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate that he met the above criteria for consideration of a hardship discharge.  
The NDRB determined there was no impropriety with the discharge action as approved; no other narrative reason for separation more clearly describes why the Applicant was discharged.  Relief is denied.

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,  and medical record entries, and the Applicant’s attestation of the events surrounding his discharge action, the NDRB determined that   Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain PERSONALITY DISORDER.  The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of  discharge.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews and Post-Service Conduct.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe 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 to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  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:  After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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.  There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct:  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate  in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 special 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.  The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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