Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501022
Original file (ND0501022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-OS3, USN
Docket No. ND05-01022

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050516. The Applicant requests that his characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051215. After a thorough review of all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, impropriety in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the discharge characterization and the reason for discharge shall change to: HONORABLE /SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-164, Separation Code “JFF”.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated
Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I feel that given my tenure in the Navy and the reason for my discharge, personality disorder, I feel this is an injustice. During my tenure on active duty I was never disciplined or counseled for any reason. I feel that I should at the very minimum be granted a “General under Honorable Conditions” discharge, although given my length of service I feel that an “Honorable” discharge should be given.
I feel anything less discredits my honorable service in the U.S. Navy. I have supplied evidence starting with my high ASVAB scores, Honor Graduate at OS “A” school, my early advancement to E-4 (which was received of only eight months of active duty), and my medical records from Fleet Mental Health Unit, San Diego, California. I feel that with the supplied evidence an “Other Than Honorable” discharge is unwarranted.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member – 4)
Enlisted Qualifications History (NAVPERS 1070/604)
Honor Graduate Certificate for Operations Specialist “A” School, dtd May 28, 2004
Letter of Appreciation, OS “A” School, Fleet Combat Training Center, Atlantic
Certificate of Appointment to OS3, dtd October12, 2004
Accelerated Advancement to Operational Specialist Third Class, dtd October 12, 2004
Evaluation Report, dtd November 23, 2004, NAVPERS 1616/26 page 2
Medical evaluation, dtd January 13, 2005 (4 pages)
Mental Health Progress Note, dtd January 26, 2005
Mental Health Progress Note, dtd February 16, 2005
Applicant’s voluntary statement regarding his medical difficulty

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20030415 – 20040113      COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20040114             Date of Discharge: 20050224

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 01 11
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

 Age at Entry: 20

Years Contracted: 4 (12 month extension)

 Education Level: 13                        AFQT: 75

 Highest Rate: OS3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA*                  Behavior: NA*             OTA: 3.00 (1)

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

* Not Available


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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225).
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

050105:  Fleet Mental Health Unit, Branch Medical Clinic NAVSTA: Report of suicidal ideation, denied a suicidal plan or intent. Additionally, reported that last Friday he was sleeping walking.
         ASSESSMENT:
         Adjustment Disorder with a Depressed Mood, military stressors.
         PLAN:
         Return on 31 Jan 05 for a complete eval with Dr. G_.
Signed: J_ P. E_, M.A. LT/MSC/USNR
050113:  Naval Medical Center San Diego, Mental Health Unit: Evaluated for concerns regarding depression and suicidal ideation. OS3 S_ (Applicant) decided to seek treatment now because of recent increased suicidal ideation. His current symptoms include a depressed mood, markedly diminished interest and pleasure, significant decrease in appetite, insomnia, fatigue, feelings of worthlessness, and a diminished ability to concentrate. OS3 S_ (Applicant) reports recurrent recent thoughts of death and recurrent suicidal ideation. Admitted to Scripps Mercy Hospital and released on 11 Jan 05, started on Lexipro. Reports two episodes of rising from bed during sleep and walking about that were observed by his roommate in “A” school.
DIAGNOSTIC IMPRESSION:
Adjustment disorder with depressed mood, sleepwalking disorder, narcissistic personality traits, military stressors.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Applicant educated regarding his diagnosis and disposition. Follow up with LT M_ on 26 Jan 05 at 1330. It is unlikely that this Sailors difficulty adjusting to shipboard life will lessen. It is also likely that if he is placed back on his ship, his suicidal ideation is likely to again increase. Therefore, his command may wish to administratively separate him for an adjustment disorder.
Signed J_ P. E_, LT/MSC/USNR and D_ G_ Ph.D.

050126:  Fleet Mental Health Unit, Branch Medical Clinic NAVSTA.
         Diagnostic Impression: Adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety, depressed mood, sleep walking disorder, and narcissistic personality traits.
         Recommendations:
         Follow up with LT M_ on 16 Feb 2005. It is unlikely that this Sailor’s difficulty adjusting to shipboard life will lessen. It is also likely if he is placed back on his ship, his suicidal ideation is likely to increase. Therefore, the recommendation of LT E_ is supported by myself to separate this individual for an Adjustment Disorder. It is recommended the ship leave this individual behind from deployment so that he may attend mental health appointments.
         Signed R_ M_, MA and J_ Y_, Staff Psychiatrist
         
050215:  Applicant’s voluntary statement describing his mental condition.

050216:  Fleet Mental Health Unit, Branch Medical Clinic NAVSTA:
         The Applicant discussed how he missed duty when his ship returned, because he did not know when the ship was coming back.
          Diagnostic Impression: Adjustment disorder, mixed anxiety, depressed mood, sleep walking disorder, and narcissistic personality traits.
         Recommendations: Follow up with LT M_ on 2 Mar 2005. It is unlikely that this sailor’s difficulty adjusting to shipboard life will lessen. It is also likely if he is placed back on his ship, his suicidal ideation is likely to increase. Further, his condition makes it unlikely that he will be able to adjust to military life and he is not fit or suitable for duty in any capacity. The servicemember has behavioral conditions that impairs the member’s performance, but does not amount to a disability. This condition obviates the member’s potential for continued Naval Service. Medical avenues are unlikely to be of further benefits of this servicemember. Although he denies current suicidal or homicidal intent, this member is judged to represent a risk to self or others if retained on active duty. He is deemed fit to return to duty for processing for administrative separation in compliance with NAVMILPRSMAN 1910-120 (Adjustment Disorder). It is recommended the ship leave this individual behind from deployment so that he may attend mental health appointments.
         
050222:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to personality disorder.
050222:  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.
050307:  Commanding Officer, USS MCCLUSKY (FFG-41), advised Commander, Naval Personnel Command, that applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of personality disorder. Commanding Officer’s comments: On 5 January 2005, OS3 S_ (Applicant) referred himself to the Fleet Mental Health Unit, Branch Military Clinic NAVSTA after having feelings of suicide ideation. After his initial evaluation he was scheduled for a complete evaluation on
1 January. I based my decision to separate the member from Naval Service on the recommendation from the evaluating doctor. OS3 S_ (Applicant) has no potential for continued naval service, and the characterization of his discharge should be general under honorable conditions. OS3 S_ (Applicant) was separated on 14 February 2005.
050224:  Discharged. Service record DD Form 214 reflects character of service as “GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS” yet the former service member’s copy of DD Form 214 reflects character of service as “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS”.

Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service and discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20050224 by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). After a thorough review of all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board discerned impropriety in the discharge action and inequity in the characterization of the Applicant ’ s service (C and D). The Board ’ s vote was unanimous that both the characterization of the discharge and the narrative reason for discharge shall change to: Honorable/Secretarial Authority.

The Applicant contends that his narrative reason for separation was unjust. He was separated by reason of personality disorder. However, a review of the Applicant’s medical record clearly identified that multiple competent medical officers diagnosed the Applicant’s conditions as adjustment disorder and sleepwalking disorder. Therefore, the Applicant should have been separated by reason of “physical or mental condition not a disability – adjustment disorder, sleepwalking” based upon his diagnosed conditions. The Board, by unanimous vote determined the narrative reason for separation was improper, and that the narrative reason for separation shall change to “Secretarial Authority”. Relief granted.

The Applicant states that his service should be characterized as honorable. Under applicable regulations, separations based on the best interest of the service (secretarial authority) should be honorable unless a general (under honorable conditions) or an entry-level separation is warranted. A general discharge may be warranted if the Applicant’s service record contains records of nonjudicial punishment, disciplinary action, or if other significant negative aspects existed which outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s period of service. Additionally a general discharge may be warranted if the Applicant’s performance evaluation averages are not sufficient to merit an honorable discharge. In the Applicant’s case, the record contains no evidence of NJP, or other disciplinary action, and no formal counseling for substandard performance. Although, the record did not contain complete documentation of evaluations, it did document a 3.0 overall trait average. Based on this partial information combined with all other available documentation the Board concluded that the sole trait average was sufficient for a finding of inequity in the Applicant’s characterization of service. Based upon the Applicant’s service record, the Board unanimously found that the Applicant’s characterization of service was inequitable and recharacterization to honorable is warranted. Relief granted.

In the Applicant’s case the NDRB has no authority to provide an additional review. 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 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until 19 June 2005, 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 II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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

 D. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600497

    Original file (ND0600497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Decisional Issues: Equity – Misdiagnosis Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)Letter from Applicant, dtd February 9, 2006 Excerpts from Service Record (2 pgs)Medical Documentation from Charleston Naval Hospital, dtd...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600153

    Original file (ND0600153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board. Neither the evidence of record nor in the documentation submitted by the Applicant show that the Applicant should have been separated for any other reason.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600056

    Original file (ND0600056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant is not currently suicidal. Plan: (1) Applicant readily agrees to present to corpsman on ship if suicidal ideations recur. Regarding the presumption of regularity in government affairs, in the absence of the administrative separation package, the Board presumed that the Applicant was properly notified of the proposed separation, afforded the opportunity to elect or waive his applicable rights, and that the separation authority approved the basis for discharge and characterization...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600069

    Original file (MD0600069.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00069 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051004. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1) Orthopedic Status Report, dtd October 22, 1999 Applicant’s State of Texas – Academic Achievement Record Applicant’s Employment activities Character Reference ltr from L_ P. S_ (Applicant’s mother), undated (7 pages) PART II - SUMMARY...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600276

    Original file (ND0600276.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214Letter to Applicant from Department of Veterans Affairs, dtd August 19, 2005 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20020130 - 20020505 COGActive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20020506 Date of Discharge: 20040225 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00237

    Original file (ND99-00237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states he sometimes feels his life is going no where. States no homicidal ideations, states suicidal ideations. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge and reason for discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The Board does not have the authority to change a discharge to a medical discharge as the applicant requests in issue 1.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00729

    Original file (ND03-00729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “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). Evaluation done by Dr. N_ who recommended pt be administratively separated from the Navy. It is possible that due to her adjustment disorder or depressive disorder NOS triggered by occupational stress, that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00742

    Original file (ND04-00742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Plan: Patient will follow-up with LT B_. Plan: Recommended administrative separation by reason of Convenience of the Government due to a mental conditions (Adjustment Disorder) not constituting a physical disability per DOD Instruction 1332.38 and MILPERSMAN 1910-120.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600226

    Original file (MD0600226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “Secretarial Authority.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area. The patient denied symptoms of psychosis, including auditory and visual hallucinations, paranoia, ideas of reference, or an active delusional system. The Applicant provided one...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00406

    Original file (ND02-00406.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I felt that there was no one to whom I could report this harassment without getting myself into trouble for reporting it. I believe that I have every reason to expect an honorable discharge and to receive the educational benefits under the GI Bill into which I contributed.Submitted by DAV:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review,...