ex-OSSN, USN

                  Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090306
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:  Characterization change to:
                   Narrative Reason change to:

                             Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:   USNR (DEP) 19980930 - 19990201   Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  19990202     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20010216 Highest Rank/Rate:  OSSN
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   15 Day(s)
Education Level:       AFQT:  61
Evaluation Marks:      Performance:  NFIR    Behavior:  NFIR  OTA:  NFIR

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     BATTLE “E”

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:
    - 19991129:  Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
      Awarded:     Suspended:

SCM:            SPCM:            CC:           Retention Warning
      Counseling:  NFIR

            Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

        “1910-122”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the
DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

                    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 Representation:
      From Congress member:

                    Other Documentation:

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

                             Applicant’s Issues

1. Seeking to reenlist.

                                  Decision

Date:  20090702        Location:  Washington D.C.  Representation:

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  PERSONALITY DISORDER.

                                 DISCUSSION

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is seeking an upgrade to reenlist and have
his reentry code changed.  The Board does not have the authority to grant
the relief for these issues.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum,
specifically the paragraph concerning  for additional information regarding
these issues.

(Decisional) ()  .  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 Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence
to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.

Although the Applicant did not identify any decisional issues, the Board
did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to  discharge
and the discharge process to ensure  discharge met the pertinent standards
of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service reflects one
NJP for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92
(Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation).  This is considered a
serious offense which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and
confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special
or general court-martial.  The command did not refer the Applicant for a
court-martial but allowed him to continue his naval service.  A General
(Under Honorable Conditions) characterization is appropriate if the
member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative
aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects
of the member’s military record.  The presumption of regularity of
governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence
of specific details of his violation of Article 92.  Therefore, the
Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the
character of his service, reflects his failure to meet the requirements of
his contract and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his
characterization of service.  Based on the seriousness of the offense
committed, length of service, and lack of mitigating factors the Board
determined the awarded characterization was warranted.

The Applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse and Personality Disorder Not
otherwise Specified (NOS) with Avoidant Features as stated in the
Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital, Pensacola letter 6520 Ser 81B/2151 of
22 January 2001, and subsequently, administratively separated by reason of
Convenience of the Government (Personality Disorder).  Pursuant to Naval
Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) 1910-122, members may be processed
for separation based on a mental health professional's clinical diagnosis
of a personality disorder when the disorder is so severe that one's ability
to function effectively and perform their duties is significantly impaired,
and the individual poses a threat to safety or well being of themselves or
others.  Separation for personality disorder is not appropriate when
separation is warranted for any other reason (e. g., member meets minimum
criteria for misconduct processing).  The record of evidence reflects the
Applicant met the requirements for processing by reason of Convenience of
the Government (Personality Disorder) and Misconduct (Commission of a
Serious Offense).  Since the Applicant was only notified of administrative
separation due to Personality Disorder, the Board determined there was an
impropriety because the command failed to separate the member for
misconduct as required.  However, since the Board does not have the
authority to impose a more severe discharge than received by the member,
the narrative reason shall remain as issued.



Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the
Applicant’s Summary of Service,   Record Entries, Discharge Process and
issue presented by the Applicant, the Board found the discharge was
improper but equitable.
For the reasons noted above, the awarded characterization of service shall
GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for
separation shall remain .

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing until
fifteen years from the date of  discharge.  The Applicant is directed to
the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews,
Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct.

                          Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 27, effective
27 March 2000 until 13 August 2001, Article 1910-122, Separation By Reason
of Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s).

B.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560D), Change 23, effective
29 May 2008 until Present, Article 1910-122, Separation By Reason of
Convenience of the Government - Personality Disorder(s).

C.  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 Association of Service Disable 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 his 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 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