Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00706
Original file (ND01-00706.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00706

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010424, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before a Traveling Panel closest to San Antonio, TX. The applicant designated the Texas Veterans Commission as his representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington, DC area. He was also advised that the board first conducts documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant or his representative introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.


Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Police Record Check dated April 2, 2001
Copy of DD Form 214
 Chronological ordered list of employments

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     940804 - 941016  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 941017               Date of Discharge: 960708

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 01 08 22
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 68

 Highest Rate: SA
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: MNF*        Behavior: MNF    OTA: 1.83
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None
Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 * Marks Not Found in service record.
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950811:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from place of duty; violation of UCMJ Article 113: Misbehavior of a lookout.
          Award: Restriction and extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record. [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS LEFTWICH'S LTR OF 26 JUN 96].
960510:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from place of duty.
          Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
960515:  Naval Medical Clinic, Pearl Harbor, HI (Psychiatric Evaluation): This was first USN psychiatric eval for this 21 year old married, Caucasian male, E2/SN with one year and seven months of continuous active duty stationed at USS LEFTWICH. Was seen on an emergent basis at NAVMEDCL, Mental Health Department, Pearl Harbor due to homicidal ideation.
Chief Complaint: Stress, unable to deal with problems with Command.
History of Present Illness: Pt seen in emergent psychiatric eval due to concerns regarding his homicidality. Pt reported several stressors since Dec 95, including allegations that his seven year old stepdaughter was molested by a shipmate, reporting it to Family Advocacy Program (FAP), and feeling as though they were not doing anything about it; Captain's Mast for being fifty minutes UA and currently being on restriction; feeling harassed by his Command (particularly his Chief), regarding his marriage to a woman fifteen years his senior with six children; having Hawaiian Electric Company contact his command regarding an unpaid electric bill which was reportedly a misunderstanding; and generally feeling unsupported by his Command………..Although the pt has had two Captain's Masts, the pt felt hat his problem was not his own behaviors, but the behavior of others on his ship and their tendency to focus on his marriage to an older woman…………Although pt stated that he would refrain from harming anyone, it is likely that p would continue to be a disciplinary problem and impediment to good working order due to his inability to accept responsibility for his behaviors and his continued insistence that it is his Command that has been creating problems for him. Regardless of counseling and other disciplinary actions, it is not likely that the pt will change his coping mechanisms or change his feelings regarding his situation. Pt denied current suicidal/homicidal ideation, intent or plan and denied history of gestures or attempts.
Diagnosis: Axis I: Occupational Problem V62.2; Axis II: Personality disorder NOS with Immature and Avoidant Personality Features, #301.9; Axis III: None known.
Recommendation: 1 - Pt is psychiatrically fit for return to full duty, but unsuitable for retention, and is responsible for his actions. 2 - Suicidal/homicidal risk is currently judged to be low with no ideation, plan or history. However, if pt retained in the USN, it is likely that homicidal risk my increase due to his anger and rage toward his Command and his inability to copy effectively with these feelings.
4 - Member is not considered mentally ill, but manifests a longstanding disorder of character and behavior which is of such severity as to render the individual incapable of serving adequately in the Navy. Member does not presently require, and will not benefit from hospitalization or psychiatric treatment. Although not presently considered suicidal or homicidal, he is judged to represent a continuing danger to self or others if retained in the Naval service. Member deemed fit for return to duty for immediate processing for admin separation which should be initiated expeditiously by his Command .

960624:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) 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 as evidenced by psychiatric evaluation on 15 May 1996.
960625:  Applicant advised of his 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.
960626:  Commanding Officer, USS LEFTWICH, advised BUPERS applicant's discharge was directed with a general (under honorable conditions) 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, and applicant was discharged on 8 July 1996.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 960708 with a general (under honorable conditions) 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 and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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 (D and E).
Issue 1. The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He 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. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 13, effective 24 June 1996 until 02 Oct 1996), Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

B. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective 22 Jul 94 until 2 Oct 96), Article 3620225, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THE BASIS OF PERSONALITY DISORDER

C. 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.

D. 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.

 E. 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 “ afls10.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


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | n0300386

    Original file (n0300386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00386 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030107. This recommendation requires counseling & documentation that the personality disorder interferes with the performance of duty. [PARTIAL DISCHARGE PACKAGE MISSING] PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19921223 under honorable conditions (general) for convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01207

    Original file (ND99-01207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. The pt was referred by Chaplain W_ for eval of stress, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideations. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970919 general (under honorable conditions) 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01207 (3)

    Original file (ND99-01207 (3).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. The pt was referred by Chaplain W_ for eval of stress, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideations. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970919 general (under honorable conditions) 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00945

    Original file (ND02-00945.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    900202: Naval Medical Clinic, NAS North Island, CA: This 23 year old female technician (Applicant) from Oregon, 12 years formal education, 12 months active duty in the U.S. Navy, married 18 months, unable to [provide] her husband's location, one child from previous relationship is referred to this facility for clinical evaluation following suicidal ideation yesterday and probable suicidal gesture prevented by her roommate. Pt (Applicant) referred to Psychiatry Naval Hospital San Diego for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00083

    Original file (ND01-00083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00083 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001020, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Pt denied any suicidal/homicidal ideation or history of same. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 24, effective 20 May 99 until 26 March 2000, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225), Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s) B.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01052

    Original file (ND02-01052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since reporting to ship 7 months ago has had increased dissatisfaction which has result in 5-6 fights off base and 1 physical fight with his girlfriend 2 months ago on leave. Mbr not currently suicidal/homicidal but presents a continuing risk/liability to harm self/others if returned on board ship& in the USN. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 881021 under honorable conditions (general) for convenience of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00326

    Original file (ND02-00326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I tried several times to get some time off so I could take care of these other problems but even after explaining my situation to my Division Chief, he told me the only thing that was important was the inspection and that I would just have to put my problems on hold until after the inspection was over. I had stopped the partying several years back and only had the occasional drink from time to time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00988

    Original file (ND02-00988.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-FA, USN Docket No. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 950708: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service authorized of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00670

    Original file (ND04-00670.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00670 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040317. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Because the medical officer has indicated he may accidentally or intentionally harm himself or others in an attention seeking gesture (medical document provided), I have expeditiously discharged SN M_ (Applicant) on 19 September 1991, with a discharge characterized as type warranted by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00296

    Original file (ND01-00296.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Performance Evaluations (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 911210 - 920826 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920827 Date of Discharge: 940812 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 11 16 (Doesn't exclude lost...