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

Docket No. ND03-00856

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

ex-EN3, USN
Docket No. ND03-00856

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030424.  The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to honorable and personality disorder on my DD 214, line #28 be removed.  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 20040312.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the reason for discharge of Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the reason for the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: HONORABLE/ PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I am disputing my discharge honorable with personality disorder. I was discharged because of depression and stress. I have my medical record that states the reason for my discharge. I have been under medical treatment at the VA Medical Center of Nashville for depression and stress. As indicated throughout my medical record and doctors notes I have not been treated for personality disorder.

I am requesting that the discharge with personality disorder on my DD214 line #28, be removed. My medical records will support my request. I do not have a personality disorder and I have not been diagnose with this disorder.

I enlisted in the US Navy in December 1995. I received my B.S degree before joining the Navy. I joined the Navy to pursue my degree in Law. I ended up in engineering and my command would not allow me to cross rate. I spent my Navy career as an engineer which caused great stress and depression, because I wanted to be in legal.

Thank you,

R_ A_ (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
VA Form 10-5345, Request for and consent to release of medical records protected by 38 U.S.C. 7332
Twenty-eight pages of medical records

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	920922 - 931006	ELS
		   USNR (DEP)	950923 – 951204	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  951205		Date of Discharge:  980826

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  08  22
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  26			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  15			AFQT:  50

Highest Rate:  EN3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*			Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*  No Marks available for review

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

HONORABLE/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980706:	Mental Health Consultation Report: Diagnosis: Adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood.

980826:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with an honorable by reason of personality disorder, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122.

Applicant’s discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980826 with a honorable 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 discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  Under the presumption of regularity, the Naval Discharge Review Board may affirm the original decision even if official records, which it would normally be required to review as part of the discharge review process cannot be located.  However, all information provided by the applicant, which might relate to the misconduct that provided for the characterization of the discharge will be considered by the Board.  The applicant may overcome the presumption of regularity by providing substantial credible evidence, that the contested discharge decision was improper or inequitable.  The documentation and statements provided by the Applicant were not sufficient to overturn the presumption that the Applicant was properly diagnosed with a personality disorder.  Therefore, relief is denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  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, however, 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 should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an 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 other evidence pertaining to her discharge at that time.  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 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 31 Aug 1998, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225), SEPARATION BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PERSONALITY DISORDER(S).

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: