Author: CAP
Last saved by: joyce.meeks
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND05-01517

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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-SN, USNR
Docket No. ND05-01517

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050912.  The Applicant requests the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that he was approaching the 15-year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing at the Washington Navy Yard, Washington, D.C.  Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060619.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain Honorable by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder.

.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I would like to have Borderline personality disorders taken off on the bottom part of my DD-214 where it says mental physical conditions.  I do not want this to preclude me from postal/security jobs.  I am not the person I was then!  I feel I deserve a second chance.  I pay my taxes, and have no felonies on my record. I have proven in my opinion that I deserve another shot.  I would like this black mark on my record to be erased.”

Applicant’s Remarks:  Taken from the DD Form 293.)

Please give me the chance to better my employment opportunities.  I have gone to some college and have worked many jobs as a model citizen more importantly I have no felonies, or misdemeanors on my record that would stop me from gaining employment.  I do not even have a parking ticket.  My Meps station was in Manchester, N.H. in 1988.  My separation was from Pearl Harbor duty stations in May of 1988.  These two places may contain my pertinent information.  I am now 36 years old and want a good job before I retire.  Thank you for your time and efforts.

Documentation

In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Enlisted Performance Evaluation Report, dtd January 16, 1991
Navy Occupation/Training and Award History

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19880222 - 19880822		COG       	
Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19880222		Date of Discharge:  19910503

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02 08 12
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):  

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  18

Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  31

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.7 (2)	Behavior:  3.6 (3)			OTA:  3.70

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal

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

HONORABLE/Other physical/mental conditions - personality disorder, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

880822:	Commenced active duty for a period of 36 months.

890512:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Delinquent qualification in general damage control and 3-M Maintenanceman PQS.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

910227:	Applicant referred to Naval Medical Clinic, Branch Medical Clinic, Mental Health, Pearl Harbor, HI, by command due to concerns over attitude and ability to perform his job safely, decreased job performance, inability to keep himself clean, and belief that people were picking on him

910313:	Medical evaluation by M. C. M_, Lt, MSC, USNR, Clinical Psychologist.
[Medical officer statement, something close to the following]  Applicant diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depressed mood, resolving, avoidant personality disorder, severe, EPTE.  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 may be a danger to himself at a later date if not removed from the military system.

910320:	Medical evaluation by M. C. M_ LT, MSC, USNR, 
Applicant appeared somewhat agitated and concerned about his discharge.  A:  Pt responding to the stress of uncertainty poorly.  Not considered suicidal.  P: Will continue to follow until patient separated or leave Pearl Harbor.  Will provide support and guidance as needed.

910327:	Medical evaluation at Mental Health Unit by M. C. M_, LT, MSC, USNR, Clinical Psychologist.
[Medical officer statement, something close to the following]  Applicant diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depressed mood DNEPTE and avoidant personality disorder EPTE as evidenced by feelings of shame and rage when criticized and ______ of personal relations, isolation, and fear of rejection and embarrassment.  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 a continuing risk of harm to self.

910403:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general by reason of convenience of the government due to a severe personality disorder, with a potential for self harm, as evidenced Naval Branch Medical Clinic, Mental Health Consult reports of 27 February 1991, 13 March 1991, 20 March 1991 and 27 March 1991, and, the Discharge Note from Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii of 11 March 1991.

910403:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

910417:	Medical evaluation at M. C. M_ LT, MSC, USNR, Naval Medical Clinic, Branch Medical Clinic, Mental Health, Pearl Harbor, HI.
S:  “It looks like I’ll be getting out in a couple weeks”.  A:  Pt mood increase due to belief that he will be leaving service.  He remains suicide risk if events change.  Not in imminent risk of suicide.  AXIS I: Adjustment disorder with depressed mood, in partial remission.  AXIS II:  Avoidant personality disorder.  P:  Continued to provide supportive therapy as service members awaits discharge.

910419:	Applicant found qualified for separation.

910426:	Commanding Officer, Naval Station, Pearl Harbor, HI directed type warranted by service record discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a severe personality disorder, with a potential for self harm, as evidenced by enclosures (3) through (10).  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “After reviewing all of the evidence, I concur with the findings of qualified medical authority that SN P_(Applicant)’s personality disorder poses a threat of self-harm while subject to military lifestyle.  Therefore, in accordance with reference (c), SN P_(Applicant) is being separated from the naval service by reason of convenience of the government due to personality disorder.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19910503 by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of honorable.  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 (B and C).  

The Applicant states, “I would like to have Borderline personality disorders taken off the bottom part of my DD-214 where it says mental physical conditions.  I do not want this to preclude me from postal/security jobs”. The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  The Applicant does not deny that he was suffering from a personality disorder at the time of his discharge from naval service.  He was diagnosed by a qualified medical officer, 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. The Applicant's DD Form 214, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, indicates he was separated for a Personality Disorder. This fact is supported by consult reports of 19910227, 19910313, 19910320 and 19910327, from Naval Branch Medical Clinic, Mental Health Pearl Harbor, HI and the Discharge Note from Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii of 19910311.  No other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged.  To change the Narrative Reason Separation would be inappropriate.

The Applicant states, “I would like this black mark on my record to be erased.”
The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  As indicated above, the Board determined the Applicant’s narrative reason proper and equitable at the time of issuance.  Further, the Applicant’s assertion that his separation contains “adverse comments” is without merit.  The Applicant’s narrative reason for separation, “Personality Disorder,” is an accurate narrative description of the reason for the Applicant’s discharge and is considered neither punitive nor adverse but a statement of fact.  Relief denied.

The Applicant requests consideration of his request for a change to his narrative reason based on post service equity. The Applicant states “ I have gone to some college and have worked many jobs as a model citizen more importantly I have no felonies, or misdemeanors on my record that would stop me from gaining employment.” The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 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.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

The NDRB has no authority to provide additional review of this case since Applicant’s discharge occurred more than 15 years ago.  The Applicant may, however, petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100, concerning a change in the characterization of naval service, if he desires further review of his case.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 14, effective 
22 Dec 90 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		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