Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300450
Original file (ND1300450.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ET3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20121221
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:         US N R (DEP)        20010214 - 20010625     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20010626     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040715      Highest Rank/Rate: ET3
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 20 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 76
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.7 ( 3 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.87

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NEM NASR

Periods of UA /C ONF :     NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20010627: For fraudulent entry.

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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation:           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 19 June 2005, Article 1910-122, 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 , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends his discharge was based upon prejudicial errors of fact and discretion , because he does not have a P ersonality D isorder as the personality testing revealing a schizoid personality structure wa s incompatible with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder, and he was not diagnosed according to medical best practices.
2.       The Applicant contends the NDRB has granted a change of the narrative reason when N aval S ervice members submitted detailed packages that present ed credible evidence to rebut a diagnosis of P ersonality D isorder.
3.       The Applicant contends he was not given an opportunity to rehabilitate his conduct before separation proceedings were initiated.
4.       The Applicant contends there is substantial doubt he would have received a P ersonality D isorder discharge under current policies and procedures based upon current diagnostic criteria and if his diagnosis had been reviewed by higher-level officials and had addressed co-morbidity with other mental disorders.
Decision

Date: 20 1 3 1021             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

Discussion

 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 g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning. Based on a mental health diagnosis dated 02 J une 2004, the Applicant’s command process ed him for administrative separation . The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . He was not eligible to appear before an administrative separation board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was based upon prejudicial errors of fact and discretion , because he does not have a P ersonality D isorder as the personality testing revealing a schizoid personality structure wa s incompatible with a diagnosis of B orderline P ersonality D isorder, and he was not diagnosed according to medical best practices. On 2 June 2004, the supervising clinical psychologist at Naval Ambulatory Care Center Groton, CT diagnosed the Applicant with Dysthymia and Borderline Personality Disorder and recommended an expeditious separation. On 29 November 2011 and 31 January 2012 , mental health professionals from the Yale University School of Medicine evaluated the Applicant and arrived at the conclusion that the Applicant suffered from a major depressive disorder, single episode, in full remission on or around early June 2004 brought on by life events that were corroborated with the Applicant’s medical and service record s and testimony. The extensive 2011 and 2012 examinations also revealed no signs of a Borderline Personality Disorder. After a complete review of the 2004 medical records , in conjunction with the 2011 and 2012 diagnoses and the testimony provided by the Applicant, his family, and the psychiatrist who evaluated the Applicant in 2011, the NDRB concurred with the assessment that the Applicant does not have a Personality Disorder and voted unanimously that the narrative reason for separation shall change to S ecretarial Authority. Relief granted.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the NDRB has granted a change of the narrative reason when N aval S ervice members submitted detailed packages that present ed credible evidence to rebut a diagnosis of P ersonality D isorder. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. While the Applicant may contend his case may be similar to other cases adjudicated by the NDRB, each case must stand on its own merits. Therefore no two cases, no matter how similar, are guaranteed to receive the same characterization or narrative reason. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was not given an opportunity to rehabilitate his conduct before separation proceedings were initiated. If a member is diagnosed by a competent mental health professional with a P ersonality D isorder and determined to be a danger to himself or others, the requirement for a Page 13 counseling and warning with subsequent rehabilitative treatment does not apply. Pursuant to Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-122, members may be processed for separation based on a mental health professional’s clinical diagnosis of 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. On 02 June 2004, a supervising clinical psychologist at Naval Ambulatory Care Center Groton, CT conducted a mental health evaluation on the Applicant and diagnosed him with Dysthymia and Borderline Personality Disorder, manifested by emotional instability, self - mutilation, warned of potential for high risk for suicidal behavior if allowed to remain in service, and recommended expeditious separation from the Navy. The NDRB determined that, based upon the clinical psychologist’s diagnosis and recommendation for expeditious separation, a Page 13 retention warning and a rehabilitative period w ere not required. Relief denied.

Issue 4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends there is substantial doubt he would have received a P ersonality D isorder discharge under current policies and procedures based upon current diagnostic criteria and if his diagnosis had been reviewed by higher-level officials and had addressed co-morbidity with other mental disorders. The NDRB determined this issue did not warrant relief. Relief denied.
Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, d ischarge p rocess, and testimony, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but the narrative reason for separation shall change to with a corresponding Separation Code change to JFF . The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews from the NDRB. H e may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for any further reviews or issues. Their website is http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm .


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 Disabled American 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 their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 at 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400445

    Original file (MD1400445.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s diagnosis of Personality Disorder, command administratively processed for separation. After a complete review of the service and medical records and the post-service VA medical documentation, the NDRB determined his discharge for Personality Disorder was proper. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301843

    Original file (MD1301843.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301244

    Original file (ND1301244.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was afforded the opportunity to rebut his administrative separation at the time of notification, but he waived his rights and accepted his command’s recommendation of an Honorable discharge for Personality Disorder.However, per MILPERSMAN Article 1910-122, “separation for personality disorder is not appropriate when separation is warranted for any other reason….” With the Applicant’s diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder and recommendation for separation, he met the requirements for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401148

    Original file (MD1401148.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101033

    Original file (MD1101033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the medical and service records are incomplete, available evidence indicates the Applicant was administratively processed for separation due to Personality Disorder. Accordingly, the Board found that relief was warranted on the basis of equity, and the characterization of service will be changed to Honorable. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102153

    Original file (ND1102153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201124

    Original file (MD1201124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the recommendation of competent medical authority, the Applicant’s command administratively processed for separation due to a diagnosis of Personality Disorder, not otherwise specified, with Cluster B features. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400086

    Original file (ND1400086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board for PTSD by proper authority. The NDRB determined his discharge for Personality Disorder was proper, and no other narrative reason for separation more clearly describes why the Applicant was discharged. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201492

    Original file (ND1201492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall HONORABLE.By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201520

    Original file (ND1201520.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion 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...