Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00817
Original file (ND04-00817.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FC3, USN
Docket No. ND04-00817

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040422. The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to “remove adverse entries.” 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 20050118. After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service or the reason for discharge 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 attempting to dissolve any confusion that has been sent to me as well as those that are interested in correcting this issue of my enlistment. Since submitting my previous request I have been discharged with a less than favorable condition. Specifically I was deemed to have acquired a “personality disorder” while in the service. I feel that this is not necessarily true since I have been with a specialist since I was sixteen and have never been diagnosed with such a disorder before. In fact during entry it was never even an issue. The best explanation that I can conceive is the lack of respect that I have endured due to no assistance and blatant slander. My original submission was in regards to a college fund that was supposed to be included in my contract and was subsequently a two-part reward. I have received the cash bonus but the college fund over and above the Montgomery G.I. college investment. I have received a response to this from the Navy Inspector General. He also stated that the data was not in my contract and I explained to him that it never was. I was told three or more military entry officials that it would be understood by the dispersing agent and was a “package”. I am requesting that the offering and proposed reward that I signed for to be investigated. Not only in paper form but also what was the prescribed offerings at the time and what was offered to me. This I believe may have been the cause for this proposed “personality disorder”. In addition I am requesting that the adverse matter of the “personality disorder” and reenlistment code to be removed from my discharge orders. ”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Ltr frm Applicant dtd 040413

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990903 - 990912  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990913               Date of Discharge: 030926

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 00 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 month extension)

 Education Level: 15                        AFQT: 65

 Highest Rate: FC3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.50 (2)             Behavior: 3.00 (2)                OTA: 3.31

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

000713:  CO’s NJP [Extracted from medical record].

010830:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from unit in Mazatlan, Mexico for 1 hour 20 minutes. Violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Incapacitation for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 7 days, RIR. RIR susp [6mos]. No indication of appeal in the record.

030925:  Medical Evaluations:
         History of present illness: The patient reports for routine medication management f/u as a walk-in. He states he is getting out processed from the Navy for a personality disorder which he agrees with, is relieved but has some mixed emotions. He is able to increase his clarity of thought, is getting rest and good sleep. His appetite has improved, is enjoying life a little better, although his energy level is down. Overall his depression has improved “25%.”

         Current Medications: Imitrex, Benadryl, NKDA

         Assessment:
                  AXIS I: MDD, moderate, single with response to Zoloft
                  AXIS II: Schizotypal Personality Disorder, primary Dx
                  AXIS III: Migraines
                  AXIS IV: PWSE (pending separation from military, bereavement, occupational problems.
                  AXIS V: (current) high 50’s
                  AXIS V: (highest) 70’s
                  Paine: denied

030926:  DD Form 214 issued, Applicant discharged with Honorable characterization by reason of personality disorder.

Discharge package not contained in service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030926 with an Honorable characterization by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder (A). After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C). The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (D).

Issue 1. 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. The Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by a competent medical authority on 20030925. Thus, the Board finds that the Reason for Discharge reflects the applicant's mental health status at the time of his discharge, and was proper and equitable at the time of issuance. "Personality Disorder" is an accurate narrative description of the reason for the applicant's discharge. The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation was improper or inequitable. Relief denied.

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/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. The Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary. As such, this Board presumed that Applicant’s discharge was regular in all respects. Relief denied.

Regarding the Applicant’s statement’s concerning the “college fund,” the NDRB’s review is limited to a review of the propriety and equity of discharge. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. 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. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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. 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225), Separation By Reason of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s)

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 .

 D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

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


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501476

    Original file (ND0501476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20010911 by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The Applicant was discharged on 20010911 with a DD Form 214 that listed the separation authority as MILPERSMAN 1910-102 and the narrative reason for separation as personality disorder. On 20010926, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01467

    Original file (ND04-01467.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I feel that the discharge I was given, “personality disorder,” was just a way of the ship discharging me without having to pay or compensate me in any way. I had to come up with that money to pay the Navy back as well.Although I did see doctors while I was in the service, not only the ship’s doctor, but also a lieutenant who is a staff psychologist at Naval Hospital Bremerton, WA. I was profoundly upset with the discharge I was given, but due to time constraints and the ships ignorance, I...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00302

    Original file (ND01-00302.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "After review of member's medical evaluation by the Psychiatrist at Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton, I ams separating member under article 3620225. 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).The applicant’s first issue states: “I am respectfully requesting the type of discharge to be changed to Family Hardship, for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500980

    Original file (ND0500980.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20030109 by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00193

    Original file (ND03-00193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My reason for discharge was a medical condition.” Documentation The Applicant’s service record and discharge package were not available. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, relief will not be granted.The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01049

    Original file (ND02-01049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01049 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020722, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to hardship. I would like my Narrative reason for separation and my Separation code upgraded so that I may serve my country again. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00329

    Original file (ND00-00329.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was discharged because of a personality disorder. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Statement from applicant, re: DD Form 14 dated January 4, 2000 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 950911 - 960721 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960722 Date of Discharge: 981030 Length of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01378

    Original file (ND04-01378.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Accordingly, I have directed his General (under Honorable Conditions) separation for convenience of the government due to a personality disorder.] The Applicant does not deny that he was suffering from a personality disorder at the time of his discharge from naval service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00754

    Original file (ND03-00754.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to HONORABLE (PERSONALITY DISORDER UPGRADED). Additional comments submitted by Applicant’s representative (American Legion):“On behalf of the above referenced Applicant, and in accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the following informal comments; and/or issue(s). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01303

    Original file (ND02-01303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After the counseling I was recommended for discharge.I think the record should be changed because I was given an honorable discharge and because the recruiter had misused me. 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).The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, will change the reason for discharge if...