DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6830-18 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 (b) USD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards 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” Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/ attachments (2) Advisory Opinion of 8 Jul 19 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) requesting a discharge upgrade following his separation for a personality disorder. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 3 October 2019, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of his naval service and medical records, applicable statutes, regulations, policies, and an advisory opinion (AO) from a qualified mental health provider. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice found as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. b. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interests of justice to review the application on its merits. c. The Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 30 June 1998. On 30 November 1998, he received a written counseling warning for an alcohol abuse incident and was directed to participate in intensive outpatient treatment. On 9 May 1999, he was in an unauthorized absence status for four days. The administrative separation documents are not in the Petitioner’s electronic service record. However, based on the information contained on the Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), it is apparent that his command initiated separation proceedings by reason of convenience of the government for a condition not a disability on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the Petitioner incapable of serving adequately in the naval service. Based on Petitioner’s number of years of service, he was not entitled to an administrative discharge board, and the lowest eligible discharge characterization he could have received was general (under honorable conditions) (GEN). On 25 June 1999, he was discharged from the Navy with a GEN discharge. The Board specifically noted that the narrative reason for separation was “personality disorder,” and his separation code was “JFX,” which corresponds to and describes a separation case involving a personality disorder. d. Petitioner contends that his discharge was cause by the anxiety and depression he suffered due to family problems. e. As part of the review process, a Navy licensed clinical psychologist reviewed Petitioner’s contentions and the available records, and provided the Board with an advisory opinion (AO) on 8 July 2019. The AO noted the Petitioner did not provide any medical or clinical records confirming a diagnosis of anxiety or depression. The AO observed that, in-service, the Petitioner was diagnosed with a personality disorder, which the AO stated is not attributed to military service as it describes lifelong character traits. The AO concluded by opining there is insufficient evidence to attribute the Petitioner’s misconduct that contributed to his discharge to a mental health condition other than a personality disorder. CONCLUSION: The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in reference (b). Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by this policy. Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s request warrants partial relief. The Board found an injustice in describing the discharge as a diagnosed character and behavior disorder. Describing Petitioner’s service in this manner attaches a considerable negative and unnecessary stigma, and fundamental fairness and medical privacy concerns dictate a change. With that being determined, the Board concluded that no useful purpose is served by continuing to label the Petitioner’s discharge as being for a mental health related condition, and certain remedial administrative changes are warranted to the DD Form 214. The Board determined a change to Petitioner’s narrative reason for separation is warranted to “secretarial authority.” The Board further found that his reentry/reenlistment code should be changed to “RE-3G.” This reentry code corresponds to “condition (not physical disability) interfering with the performance of duty,” and is the appropriate designation in personality disorder cases absent any evidence to the contrary. The Board also found that the separation authority should be changed to “MILPERSMAN 1910-164,” and the separation code to “JFF.” Notwithstanding the recommended corrective action below, the Board did not find a material error or injustice with the Petitioner’s GEN discharge characterization. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including Petitioner’s contentions that included, but were not limited to: he suffered from anxiety and depression on active duty, he experienced two family deaths that created a hardship, his wife was not able to adapt to city living and left with their child back to her village, and he was a good sailor and made all efforts to continue to be an exemplary shipmate, but due to the circumstances and not having the necessary support, his health deteriorated. In accordance with the published guidance, the Board gave liberal and special consideration to his record of service, and his contentions about any mental health issues he may have experienced and their possible adverse impact on his service. However, even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that there was no evidence that he suffered from any type of mental health issues on active duty, or that any such mental health conditions were related to, or mitigated, the conduct that formed the basis of his discharge. Accordingly, the Board determined there was no material error or injustice in his GEN discharge characterization, and concluded that the Petitioner’s separation was proper and in compliance with all Navy directives and policy at the time of his discharge. RECOMMENDATION: In view of the foregoing, the Board found the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. That Petitioner’s separation authority be changed to “MILPERSMAN 1910-164,” the separation code be changed to “JFF,” the narrative reason for separation be changed to “secretarial authority,” and the reentry/reenlistment code be changed to “RE-3G.” That Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 1 August 2018. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and, having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 10/27/2019