DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No:  2969-18
JUL 25 2019 


Dear  : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three­member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the 
24 July 2018 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health professional, a copy of which the Board mailed to you on 25 July 2018. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 21 April 1988. On 1 December 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for three days of unauthorized absence (UA). On 14 March 1989, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of wrongful appropriation of a government vehicle. On 17 May 1989, you received NJP for two periods of UA totaling 27 days. On 7 June 1989, administrative discharge action was initiated against you for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and a pattern of misconduct. You consulted with counsel and elected to waive your right to request an administrative discharge board. Your commanding officer recommended that you receive an other than honorable (0TH) discharge. The separation authority concurred and directed that you receive an 0TH discharge, which you received on 7 July 1989. 

Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense's Memorandum, "Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment" memorandum of 25 August 2017. 

A qualified mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion that you were suffering from a mental health condition during your, service. The AO noted, in part, that the term "split personality disorder" was formerly used to denote what is now known as dissociative identity disorder (multiple personality disorder). The AO noted that you were diagnosed with "mixed personality disorder with passive aggressive and explosive features." This is different from "split personality disorder" in that it is not a primary mental disorder, but rather a pervasive set of maladaptive personality characteristics that would not have yielded a referral to a medical board. A medical note dated 26 May 1989 by a psychiatrist at the Naval Hospital    indicates, "It was determined that the subject service member suffers from a severe longstanding Mixed Personality Disorder, with Explosive and Passive-Aggressive Features. This disorder existed prior to enlistment and is of such severity as to render him incapable of serving adequately in the United States Navy. The member is not considered to have a mental illness." The AO opined that your personality disorder cannot be attributed to military service nor can the in-service misconduct be attributed to a mental health condition. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your assertions that you were given an option to leave the service, you had been diagnosed with a split personality disorder, and were young and very immature. The Board was also sympathetic to the fact that you needed help and wished you were given more options. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant changing your characterization of service given your misconduct. Further, the Board concurred with the AO's statement your personality disorder cannot be attributed to military service, nor can your misconduct be attributed to a mental health condition. The Board, therefore, found no material error or injustice in your discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters. New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely,

Executive Director