Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND03-00548

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

 ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00548

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030212.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040114.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, an impropriety and inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  However, no impropriety or inequity in the narrative reason of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was four to one that the character of the discharge shall change.  The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620225.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “Paragraph 3, article e 3620200, of the relevant MILPERSMAN states that separation under that chapter shall be characterized as "Honorable" unless one of two situations exist.  Specifically, a characterization "Honorable" MUST be granted unless an entry-level separation is required under the provisions of paragraph 3a, article 3610250 or a characterization of service of "General" is warranted under the provisions of paragraph 2b, Performance Evaluation System, (1) ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION.  Paragraph 3a, article 3610250 provides that an entry level separation is for a member in an entry level status that satisfies other criteria.  Under the-provisions of paragraph 1h article- 3610200, entry level status is defined as "a status held-by a member who has served for 189 days or less".  On the date I received the information of pending separation, 10 July 1997, I had served on active duty for 255 days.  As a result the entry level separation provision was not applicable to me (2) ENLISTED PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM: Paragraph 2b, article 3610250 sets forth the types of characterization of service, which may be awarded, to a sailor discharged from the Navy.  In particular, paragraph 2b(2) article 3610250 sets forth guidance regarding when a "General Under Honorable Conditions" characterization of service is appropriate.  That provision states that "When separation is based on the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System (type warranted by service record); a member would be eligible for a characterization of service as "General" if, during current enlistment, the member has been awarded in his or her enlisted performance evaluations as final individual trait average of 1.99 or below."  The only Enlisted Performance Evaluation I received during my service in the Navy cites and individual trait average of 2.00.  The score of 2.00 is based on the assessment.  Hence, article 3610250 does not support the characterization of my service of "General Under Honorable Conditions."  C. Paragraph 2b(2), article 3610250, further provides that a "General" characterization is "warranted" when significant negative aspects of the member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's service record."  However, my record of conduct and performance is clean, as demonstrated in my file by the absence of ANY "negative aspects" to either my conduct or performance of duty.  This is further reflected on a memorandum addressing my separation, which points out that I did not engage in any military or civilian offenses during my period of service

Paragraph 3, article e 3620200, of the relevant MILPERSMAN states that separation under that chapter shall be characterized as "Honorable" unless one of two situations exist.  Specifically, a characterization "Honorable" MUST be granted unless an entry-level separation is required under the provisions of paragraph 3a, article 3610250 or a characterization of service of "General" is warranted under the provisions of paragraph 2b, Performance Evaluation System, (1) ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION.  Paragraph 3a, article 3610250 provides that an entry level separation is for a member in an entry level status that satisfies other criteria.  Under the-provisions of paragraph 1h article- 3610200, entry level status is defined as "a status held-by a member who has served for 189 days or less".  On the date I received the information of pending separation, 10 July 1997, I had served on active duty for 255 days.  As a result the entry level separation provision was not applicable to me (2) ENLISTED PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM: Paragraph 2b, article 3610250 sets forth the types of characterization of service, which may be awarded, to a sailor discharged from the Navy.  In particular, paragraph 2b(2) article 3610250 sets forth guidance regarding when a "General Under Honorable Conditions" characterization of service is appropriate.  That provision states that "When separation is based on the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System (type warranted by service record); a member would be eligible for a characterization of service as "General" if, during current enlistment, the member has been awarded in his or her enlisted performance evaluations as final individual trait average of 1.99 or below."  The only Enlisted Performance Evaluation I received during my service in the Navy cites and individual trait average of 2.00.  The score of 2.00 is based on the assessment.  Hence, article 3610250 does not support the characterization of my service of "General Under Honorable Conditions."  C. Paragraph 2b(2), article 3610250, further provides that a "General" characterization is "warranted" when significant negative aspects of the member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's service record."  However, my record of conduct and performance is clean, as demonstrated in my file by the absence of ANY "negative aspects" to either my conduct or performance of duty.  This is further reflected on a memorandum addressing my separation, which points out that I did not engage in any military or civilian offenses during my period of service”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Psychiatric evaluation from the Department of the Army, dated September 19, 2000
Certificate of quality, dated January 18, 2002
Airborne Course diploma, dated February 8, 2002
Certificate of completion, dated May 31, 2002
Diploma from United States Army Infantry School, dated January 2002
Seven pages from Applicant’s service record
Orders from Department of the Army, dated February 1, 2002
Student permanent drop record, dated July 16, 1997
Personnel qualification records
Reference letter, dated June 3, 1999
Reference letter, dated December 28, 2000
Reference letter, dated January 9, 2001
Letter of appreciation, undated
Customer comments, dated May 11, 1999
Reference letter, dated January 19, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	961002 - 961027	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  961028		Date of Discharge:  970911

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  10  14
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  78

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NOB*			Behavior:  NOB		OTA:  NOB

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*None obtained

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620225.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970702:	Applicant diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct, alcohol abuse, personality disorder not otherwise specified with borderline features.  The psychiatrist recommended separation based on a personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  Applicant was considered self-destructive and a continuing risk of harm to self or others.

970710:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.

970710:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

970728:	Commanding Officer directed discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970911 under honorable conditions (general) for convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service. (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the characterization of service was not proper or equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  On 19970702, a competent medical authority diagnosed the Applicant to possess a personality disorder not otherwise specified with borderline features.  The psychiatrist recommended separation based on a personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  Relief to the narrative reason for separation is denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

Given that the Applicant served on active duty longer than six months, reference (A) directs that the characterization of service for convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder shall be honorable, unless characterization of service as general is warranted on the basis of the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System.  The Applicant received one not observed evaluation during his enlistment, which does not warrant characterization of service under honorable conditions (general).  Therefore, relief is granted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 1996 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3620225, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PERSONALITY DISORDER.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “afls14.jag.af.mil”.  

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:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX: