DEPARTMENT OF THE  N A V Y  

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2  N A V Y   A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To: 

Secretary of the Navy 

- Ref:  (a) Title 10 U. S. C.  1552 

Subj: R E V I E W O F N A V A L R E C O R D  OF--mp 

TRG 
Docket No:  7368-01 
6 June 2002 

b 

(b) SECNAVINST 7220.383 

Encl :  (1) Case Summary 

(2) Subject's  naval  record 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference  (a), Petitioner, a 
former enlisted member of the Navy, filed an application with 
this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show 
reinstatement on active duty or a change in the reenlistment 
code.  He is also requesting that recoupment of his enlistment 
bonus be waived. 

2. The Board, consisting of Mr.  Hogue, Mr. Milner and Mr.  Cooper, 
reviewed Petitioner's  allegations of error and injustice on 29 
May 2002 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, naval records, and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining 
to Petitioner's  allegations of error and injustice, finds 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. 

Petitioner's  application was filed in a timely manner. 

c.  Petitioner enlisted in the Army on 18 August 1998 and 

received an entry level separation on 6 October 1998.  He was 
granted a waiver and enlisted in the Navy on 19 July 1999 at age 
19.  At that time, he was paid an enlistment bonus of $2,000.  He 

completed initial training, and on 27 October  1999, reported to 
his first duty station.  Subsequently, he was an unauthorized 
absentee for about nine days and was referred for a psychiatric 
evaluation.  The psychiatric evaluation dated 22 February 2000 
included several mental ability and psychiatric tests.  The 
"Personality  (or Symptom or Mood) Assessment" portion of the 
evaluation states, in part, as follows: 

The self-scoring MMPI-2  showed numerous evaluations. 
Validity  scales are indicative of a possible attempt to 
present himself in a favorable light.  .  .  .  .  They 
also reflect an inflexible style and possible deviant 
beliefs or neurotic tendencies.  Deteriorated defenses 
are likely with a poor  self-concept.  Clinical scales 
are indicative of acute stress with depression in 
prominence.  He is likely to be moody, angry, 
distrustful and quite resentful of others.  He tends to 
decompensate under stress and may exhibit behavioral 
problems.  Possible underlying personality problems are 
a likely source of his clinical picture.  These result 
in a very poor achievement and work problems. His 
history of acting out-behavior is also likely to be 
related to these personality  features.  There are 
indications of a preoccupation with feeling guilty and 
unworthy that reflect low self-esteem and feelings of 
inadequacy.  Interpersonally, he may appear to be 
overly sensitive and resistant to the demands of 
others.  This may make him appear to be argumentative 
and obnoxious.  He may also appear to be aloof but may 
show dependency on others and an exaggerated need for 
affection.  He is introverted and may have difficulty 
interacting with people.  .  .  .  .  He is rebellious, 
resentful and non-conforming.  A  limited frustration 
tolerance and dissatisfaction with current social 
adjustment is likely.  There is a likely history of 
conflicts with society.  Clinical levels of depression 
are noted with a tendency to worry over even minor 
issues.  He is indecisive and uses rationalization and 
intellectualization excessively.  He may appear to 
others as being unusual or unconventional. His history 
reflects such an avant garde lifestyle with his 
interest in music and tattoos.  .  .  .  .  . 

The evaluation conclusion states that Petitioner is far below 
average for immediate and delayed memory  for stories and delayed 
memory  for visual material.  Based on this evaluation Petitioner 
was diagnosed with a mild neurocognitive disorder with a moderate 

to severe degree of impairment for military duty and an 
adjustment disorder.  Additionally,  Petitioner was provisionally 
diagnosed with a personality disorder. 

d.  On 30 March 2000 Petitioner was notified of separation 

processing due to the diagnosed personality disorder.  In 
connection with  this processing, he elected  to waive his 
procedural  rights.  After  review, the discharge authority 
directed a general discharge.  However, on 7 April  2000 he was 
issued an honorable discharge by reason of personality disorder. 
At that time, he was not recommended for reenlistment and was 
assigned an RE-4  reenlistment code. 

e.  Petitioner is contending, in effect, that he was 

improperly discharged because he does not have a personality 
disorder.  In support of this request, he has submitted a 
psychiatric evaluation from the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA) regarding the likelihood that his neurocognitive and 
psychiatric disability was incurred or aggravated by military 
service.  The DVA psychiatrist  states, in part, as follows: 

.  .  .  .  It appears from reading  (the preceding 
evaluation)  .  .  .  that many bits of information have 
been  taken out of context, and if not, misconstrued  in 
follow up studies.  A brief review shows that this 
patient had significant psychological  trauma as a 
child.  He was  severely physically  abused by his 
paternal grandmother, with whom he lived.  In addition 
to this, his mother was constantly in and out of his 
life due to psychiatric instabilities.  He was  taunted 
and teased through school, and at age 15 suffered a 
head injury with unconsciousness,  after a fight with 
another peer.  .  .  .  .  the NMPI reflected certain 
characteristics by  (the military doctor) to view a 
personality disorder ... should be ruled out. 
(However,) it appears that his has been  taken out of 
context and this gentleman has been formally diagnosed 
with  (a) personality disorder  ... instead of the 
original intention  ... which was to further evaluate 
this gentleman and rule this out.  I strongly disagree 
with  the statement  .  .  .  . that "his history  reflects 
such an avant-garde lifestyle, his interest in music 
and tattoosv1. It should be noted that this is rather 
dated information, perhaps  40 years ago, in the 1960s 
or even 70s, this type of lifestyle would have been 
considered extreme; however,  in today's  culture, music 

and tattoos are very much  the mainstream.  I feel' (the 
military doctor) presented him as a more deviant 
gentleman  than what he actually is. 
.  .  .  .  (The military doctor)' also recommended that 
this gentleman have full neuropsychiatric testing 
redone in one year, which would be February 2001.  This 
has not yet been completed.  He currently is denying 
all symptomatology of mood disorders, anxiety 
disorders, and psychosis.  When one further reads the 
previous psychological  testing, the auditory 
hallucinations that he allegedly has,  ... it was more 
the suspicion of the examiner  that he was having  these, 
than the patient  admitting  to having  these.  The deja- 
vu experiences are simply that.  They are brief 
occurrences, maybe one or so a year, which  the 
gentleman  feels he has previously experienced  ... 
This is not an unusual phenomenon  and certainly does 
not deem this gentleman psychotic. 

The DVA doctor found an adjustment disorder by history and 
deferred a diagnosis on Axis  11, the axis on which a diagnosis of 
personality  disorder would be made.  Copies of all the 
psychiatric evaluations are attached to enclosure  (1). 

f.  Petitioner has submitted documentation  showing that he 

is indebted to the Navy in the amount of $1,551.68  and the 
Defense Finance and Account requesting payments of $100 per 
month.  Recoupment of an enlistment bonus is required when a 
member voluntarily or because of misconduct does not complete the 
term of enlistment.  Included under  this requirement are 
administrative discharges by reason of personality disorder. 
However,  recoupment is not required when a member is medically 
discharged with a physical disability. 

Reference  (b) sets forth the criteria for remission or 

g 

waiver of indebtedness, or erroneous payments made to or on 
behalf of members and former members of the Naval  service.  This 
instruction implements title 10 U.  S. C. 6161 and 10 U.  S. C. 
2774.  Waiver action based on 10 U.  S. C.  2774 is precluded  in 
this case since the payment was legal and proper when paid. 
However, under the provisions of 10 U.  S. C.  6161 a remission of 
the indebtedness of an active duty enlisted member is authorized 
if the request for remission is approved by  the Secretary of the 
Navy or a designee prior  to the individual's  honorable discharge. 

The criteria for requesting such a remission of 

indebtedness are set forth in reference  (b).  That reference 
states that an investigation must be conducted into the facts and 
circumstances surrounding the request for remission. The 
reference also directs that active duty members be advised of 
their right to request remission immediately upon discovery of an 
overpayment.  There is no indication in the record that 
Petitioner was ever advised as required. 

i.  Regulations allow for an individual's  discharge by 

reason of best interest of the service or Secretarial authority 
when discharge is warranted and no other reason is appropriate. 

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration of all  the evidence of record the 
Board concludes that Petitioner's  request warrants partial 
favorable action.  The Board weighed  the extensive evaluation 
completed while Petitioner was in the Navy against  the DVA 
evaluation which was apparently based only on an interview with 
Petitioner.  The Navy evaluation resulted in a provisional 
diagnosis of a personality disorder, and not a firm or final 
diagnosis.  The latter evaluation declined  to diagnose such a 
disorder.  However, after reviewing the Navy's  evaluation, the 
Board concludes that even if Petitioner did not have a 
personality  disorder, his problems were sufficiently severe to 
warrant discharge.  Therefore, the Board believes  that separation 
was warranted, but  the reason for discharge should be changed. 
Since no other reason fits the circumstances, the Board concludes 
that the discharge should be changed to Secretarial Authority. 
In addition the Board concludes that a record which includes a 
nine day period of unauthorized absence and the problems set 
forth in the psychiatric evaluation are sufficient to support the 
assignment of the RE-4  reenlistment code. 

The Board notes that portion of the DVA evaluation concerning 
Petitioner's  cognitive difficulties and the recommended change in 
the record to show that he was not discharged by reason of a 
diagnosed personality disorder.  Given the circumstances of the 
case, the Board believes  that Petitioner's  discharge should not 
be considered voluntary or by reason of misconduct for the 
purposes of recoupment of the unearned enlistment bonus, and 
remission of the indebtedness is warranted. 

Remission can be accomplished by  showing that a request for 
remission of indebtedness was granted under the provisions  of 
Title 10 U.  S. C. 6161 and reference  (b).  Paragraph 7a. of 
reference  (b) indicates that a decision on the request for 

remission must be made prior to discharge.  Therefore', the Board 
concludes that the record should show that Petitioner's request 
for remission of indebtedness due to the enlistment bonus was 
approved by the Secretary of the Navy on 7  April 2000. The amount 
approved for remission should be that portion of the unearned 
enlistment bonus due on the date of his discharge. 

RECOMMENDATION : 

a.  That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that 
on 7 April 2000 he was honorably discharged by reason of 
Secretarial Authority vice the discharge by reason of personality 
disorder now of record. 

b.  That the naval record be further corrected to show 
that he requested remission of his indebtedness and that this 
request was favorably endorsed by his commanding officer.  The 
amount recommended for remission is the amount due on the date of 
Petitioner's discharge. 

c.  That the naval record be further corrected to show that the 
request for remission was approved by the Secretary of the Navy 
on 7 April 2000, the date of Petitioner's discharge. 

d.  That this Report of Proceeding constitute the report of 
investigation or written report required by reference (b), and 
the Report of Proceedings be forwarded to the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service for implementation under the provisions of the 
regulations. 

e.  That Petitioner's requests for reinstatement in the Navy and 
a change in the reenlistment code be denied. 

f. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner's naval 
record. 

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. 

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN 
Recorder 

Acting Recorder 

fire 

ALAN  E. GOLDSMITH 

5 .   P u r s u a n t   t o   t h e   d e l e g a t i o n   o f   a u t h o r i t y   set  o u t . i n  S e c t i o n  
6 ( e )   of  t h e   revised  P r o c e d u r e s   o f   t h e   Board  f o r   C o r r e c t i o n   o f  
Naval  R e c o r d s   (32  Code  o f   F e d e r a l   R e g u l a t i o n s ,   S e c t i o n   7 2 3 . 6 ( e ) )  
a n d   h a v i n g   a s s u r e d   c o m p l i a n c e   w i t h   i t s  p r o v i s i o n s ,   i t  i s  h e r e b y  
a n n o u n c e d   t h a t   t h e   f o r e g o i n g   c o r r G c t i v e   a c t i o n ,   t a k e n   u n d e r   t h e  
a u t h o r i t y   of  r e f e r e n c e   ( a ) ,   h a s   b e e n   a p p r o v e d   by  t h e   Board  on 
b e h a l f   o f   t h e   S e c r e t a r y   o f   t h e   Navy. 

W .   DEAN  PF 
E x e c u t i v e   D i