Title: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Author: CAP
Last saved by: jennifer.miles
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND09-02113

ex-FN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090424
Characterization of Service Received:  (corrected)  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  (corrected)  PERSONALITY DISORDER
Authority for Discharge:  (per DD 214)  MILPERSMAN 3620200

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	HONORABLE
	Narrative Reason change to:	GOOD OF THE SERVICE

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	USNR (DEP)	19911114 - 19920426  COG	Active:	NONE

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  19920427	Age at Enlistment:  19
Period of Enlistment:  4 Years  NO Extension
Date of Discharge:  19940811	Highest Rank/Rate:  FN
Length of Service:  02 Year(s)   03  Month(s)   14 Day(s)
Education Level:  12	AFQT:  35
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  3.4 (1)	Behavior:  3.6 (1)	OTA:  3.4

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	SSDR SWASM(2) AFEM JMUA

Periods of UA/CONF:  NONE

NJP:  1

- 19921112:	Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
	Awarded: FOP RESTR EPD  Suspended:  NONE

SCM:  NONE     SPCM:  NONE     CC:  NONE

Retention Warning Counseling:  NONE

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):	20021031
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:	ND02-00416
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:		Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.
Block 24,Character of Service, should read:Block 28,Narrative Reason for Separation, should read:PERSONALITY DISORDER
Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:	
                                         DD 214:	☒	Service/Medical Record:	☒	Other Records:	☐

Related to Post-Service Period:	
	Employment:	☒	Finances:	☒	Education/Training:	☒
	Health/Medical Records:	☒	Substance Abuse:	☐	Criminal Records:	☐
	Family/Personal Status:	☒	Community Service:	☒	References:	☒
              Additional Statements:
                             From Applicant:	☐	From/To Representation:	☐	From/To Congress member:	☐
                    Other Documentation:	☒

YesYesNot ApplicableNot Applicable

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  Personality disorder and alcohol abuse diagnoses are not correct.
2.  Post-service conduct warrants consideration.
3.  Wants his narrative reason for separation changed to “Good of the Service.”

Decision

Date:  20100913	PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  Civilian Counsel

By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall change to HONORABLE.
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation).  On 5 August 1994, the Applicant was admitted to the Naval Hospital, Portsmouth, VA, for suicidal ideations.  He was discharged on 9 August 1994 with a diagnosis of alcohol abuse and personality disorder not otherwise specified with borderline and histrionic features.  Based on the attending psychiatrist’s recommendation for expeditious administrative separation, the Applicant’s command processed him for separation.  The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

Issue 1:  (Decisional) (Equity)  RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends his personality disorder and alcohol abuse diagnoses were not correct.  The Applicant provided a letter dated 24 February 2004 from a civilian psychiatrist who evaluated the Applicant and stated he saw “no evidence of any sort of mental disorder or personality disorder or alcohol abuse at this time.”  Although the Applicant provided a post-service mental health evaluation, the NDRB determined the Applicant was properly diagnosed by a mental health professional at the time of discharge.  The NDRB determined the Applicant’s alcohol abuse diagnosis was not relevant to his narrative reason for separation and is without merit.  Relief denied.

Issue 2:  (Decisional) (Equity)  RELIEF WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade in his characterization.  The NDRB considers outstanding post-service conduct 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.  The Applicant provided several letters of reference and documentation regarding his employment, finances, education and training, health and medical records, family and personal status, and community service.  After a careful review of the Applicant's post-service documentation and official service record, and taking into consideration his testimony, the testimony of his witness, and the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined relief is warranted based on equitable grounds and voted unanimously to upgrade the discharge characterization to Honorable. 

Issue 3:  (Decisional) (Equity)  PARTIAL RELIEF WARRANTED.  The Applicant wants his narrative reason for separation changed to “Good of the Service.”  The NDRB notes “Good of the Service” is not an authorized enlisted personnel separation code.  As noted in Issue 1, the NDRB determined the Applicant was properly diagnosed with a personality disorder at the time of discharge.  However, on the Applicant’s Report of Medical Examination dated 10 August 1994, the doctor noted next to block 42, Psychiatric, “adjustment disorder/personality disorder.”  Upon further review of the Applicant’s medical record by the NDRB’s staff psychiatrist, the available evidence strongly suggests the Applicant suffered from considerable dysphoria in the context of his adjustment to active duty in the US Navy, particularly with reference to his fireman rating aboard ship.  Historical elements suggestive of impulse control issues prior to his enlistment were noted, which would be expected to cause significant adjustment difficulties in the context of the restrictions normal to active duty were he to be subjected to a working milieu he perceived to be noxious.  Taken in isolation, the symptoms the Applicant suffered while on active duty would be compatible with the diagnosis of adjustment disorder, which was reported on his Report of Medical Examination of 10 August 1994.  While not a personality disorder, per se, adjustment disorders are classified as nonphysical disabilities (not considered mentally ill or disabled enough to warrant a medical evaluation board), by which the member's ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired and subject to administrative separation.  At the time of the Applicant’s discharge in 1994, adjustment disorders had not yet been formally listed but were generally understood to fall under the same category as personality disorders.  In 1994, some personality disorders did meet the criteria in the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN), Article 3620200, Separation of Enlisted Personnel by Reason of Convenience of the Government [Condition not a Disability].  Since then, adjustment disorders are listed separately in the MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120, Separation by Reason of Convenience of the Government – Physical or Mental Conditions.  Based on the current MILPERSMAN and substantial doubt the Applicant would have received the same discharge if relevant current policy had been available to the Applicant at the time of the discharge proceedings under consideration, the NDRB voted unanimously to change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. 

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service and medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge.  However, based on equitable grounds, the awarded characterization of service shall change to HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall change to Secretarial Authority.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective 22 July 1994 until 23 June 1996, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF 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 II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity. 

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “http://Boards.law.af.mil.”

Additional Reviews:  After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code:  Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct:  DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record.  Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.  

Post-Service Conduct:  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate  in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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

Key:	NFIR – Not found in record 	UA – Unauthorized absence	NJP – Nonjudicial punishment	SCM – Summary court-martial
	SPCM – Special court-martial	FOP – Forfeiture of pay	RIR – Reduction in rank	EPD – Extra duties
	CONF – Confinement	CC – Civilian conviction	CCU – Correctional Custody Unit	BW – Confinement on bread and water

Key:	NFIR - Not Found In Record 	UA – Unauthorized absence	NJP – Nonjudicial punishment	SCM – Summary court-martial	
	SPCM – Special court-martial	FOP – Forfeiture of pay	RIR – Reduction in rank	EPD – Extra Duties 
	CONF – Confinement		B&W – Confinement on bread and water