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

 ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00210

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991129, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review.  The applicant listed a civilian attorney as his representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000831.  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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

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

1. The petitioner, (applicant), respectfully requests the Board to upgrade his Other than Honorable Discharge which he received upon separation from the Marine Corps on June II, 1996, (see enclosure 1), because at the time of the events which led to his request for an administrative separation in lieu of trial by court-martial he was suffering from a psychiatric illness which prevented him from understanding the wrongfulness of his conduct.

Sometime during his introductory training, the petitioner became aware that his drill sergeants were "out to get him" and that he was in mortal danger from his surroundings.  He became an unauthorized absentee, and returned to his unit voluntarily.  While in an absentee status he was seen by psychiatrists at the Yale Psychiatric Institute, and by military psychiatrists at the Walter Reed Army Hospital (they recommended immediate discharge).  The petitioner again entered a UA status with the psychotic belief that he would be killed if he remained in the Marine Corps.  Upon return to his home town he sought professional assistance and with genuine trepidation again agreed to turn himself in to military authorities.  Upon his return, and again while in a psychotic state, he had a fight with another service member while in a temporary holding unit.  Facing charges for the UA, and the fight, he was advised by his military attorney to seek discharge by requesting administrative separation in lieu of trial by court-martial.  His request was granted, (see enclosure 2), and he was separated from the Marines.

Upon his return to his home town, and at age 19, he was not allowed to temporarily live back home with his father, who was extremely frustrated with his son's conduct and longstanding illness.  (Applicant) was forced through circumstance to encamp in the woods, and through his efforts secured employment as a construction worker.  At times he walked over 10 miles to his job site, without complaint, and earned enough money, together with what he borrowed from his church and the town social worker, to secure housing at a local motel, and then at rooming house in Ivoryton, Connecticut.  As per enclosures 3, 4, and 5, (applicant) paid back what he borrowed (and even something more), as well as paying the doctor who had to treat his foot which became infected after walking so many miles to his job.

(Applicant) completed his summer employment, and was able to attend college at the
Worcester Polytechnical Institute in Massachussets, where he is presently a physics student.  He is currently undergoing psychiatric care while attending classes.  Upon his release from the Marine Corps he was seen by L_ K_, M.D., a psychiatrist at the Yale Psychiatric Unit, who evaluated him for purposes of this petition. (enclosure 6).

It was Dr. K_'s opinion, as a forensic pyschiatrist that "he is nonetheless a young man with a serious and disabling psychiatric disorder who is prone to brief, overtly psychotic episodes", and further opines that he had a genuine, if psychotic, belief that he was in mortal danger from his surroundings while in the military.

It is the petitioner's position that the seriousness and severe degree of his life-long mental illness was not taken into consideration by the commanding general who authorized his discharge under Other than Honorable Conditions.  It is not surprising that the extent of his mental illness was not fully appreciated at the time.  (applicant), as evidenced by the enclosed letters of reference, can have periods of stability (when he is in what he perceives to be a non-threatening environment) which mask his illness.

It is terribly unfair that he be collared with an Other than Honorable Discharge from the military, for the rest of his life, given the unique circumstances of his enlistment.  He is presently being seen by proper medical personnel for what will be a lifetime condition, and he is making profound efforts at being a productive member of society. (enclosures 6 and 7).

In conclusion, the petitioner respectfully requests the Board to recommend that his military records reflect a General discharge under honorable conditions.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 215
Copy of DD Form 214
Fourteen pages from applicant's service record
Letter from applicant's father to Captain A_ B_ dated May 14, 1996
Four pages from applicant's medical record
Character reference from Pastor, St. Mary's Church of the Visitation dated August 31, 1996
Personal recommendation dated September 1, 1996 with a thank you note
Letter from D.P.M., A.A.C.F.A.S. dated August 27, 1996
Copy of psychiatric evaluation dated May 30, 1999 (10 pages) (2 copies)
Copy of Worcester Polytechnic Institute for 1996-1997 (2 pages)
Copy of Biographical Sketch of Professor of Psychiatry

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		950627 - 950704	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950705		Date of Discharge:  960611

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  07
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  85

Highest Rank:  PFC

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.4 (1)			Conduct:  1.5 (3)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  150

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6419.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

960517:	Applicant, having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Art 27b, requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court- martial.  In the request the applicant noted that his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he understood the elements of the offenses.  He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that characterization of service would be under other honorable conditions.  The applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): Unauthorized absence from 1630, 22Oct95 to 0700, 28Nov95 (36 days/surrendered) and 1800, 1Jan96 to 1700, 24Apr96 (114 days/surrendered)

960601:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

960610:	GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] determined that applicant had no potential for further service, that separation in lieu of trial by court-martial was in the best interest of the service, and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT 
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 960611 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial (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).

In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board determined a medical diagnosis on active duty or during post-service, and whether proper or improper, is not an issue upon which this Board can grant relief.  When reviewing a discharge, the Board does consider the extent to which a medical problem, diagnosed or undiagnosed while on active duty, might effect an applicant's performance and ability to conform to the military's standards of conduct and discipline.  The Board does not consider the circumstances surrounding the applicant's diagnosis or any medical treatment given to the applicant to be of sufficient nature to exculpate the applicant from his misconduct of record.  Relief will not be granted at this time.

However, the Board does recognize that the applicant has a psychological condition that affects his thought process.  At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient medical and post-service documentation to warrant an upgrade in his discharge.  The applicant is highly encouraged to apply for a personal appearance hearing provided that the application is received before 11 June 2011.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 
18 Aug 95 until present.

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article [ e.g., Article 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days].

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 “afls14.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