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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD01-00673

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010409, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested 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 010928.  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 three to two that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.3

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  My discharge was inequitable in that my character of service is based on one incident which was proven to be just that, an incident.  As stated in my letter (Document #2) my action stemmed from homesick, not a desire to hurt the Corps.  I feel and believe others do as well (Documents #1 and #2) that I proved myself to be dependable and loyal to my service.  I regret that I did not handle my situation better but to be punished for a lifetime when I've shown my desire to excel simply seems unfair.  I have made application to enlistment into the West Virginia Army National Guard, pending an R E Code: 4 waiver.  My exit physical characterizes my psychiatric state as normal.

2.  If my Character of Service were changed to Honorable, I would be able to use my MGIB which I paid my full share.  I can live without the MGIB but I feel the General under Honorable Condition Discharge coupled with an RE Code of 4 label me as a misfit and I truly don't feel I deserve such a burden when I proven I'm better than that.

3.  If you would carefully review the documents I've submitted, taking note of the dates that prove my reversal of that incident I would be forever in your debt.  I apologize that my actions probably did cause other grief, yet I am the one who bears the permanent burden, and for that I beseech you to review and change my Character of Service as well as the RE Code.

Documentation

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

Letters of Recommendations (3)
Letter from Applicant
Copies of DD Form 214 (3)
Copy of Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal Certificate
Copies from Medical Record (2pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USMC		None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		970915 - 980817	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  980818		Date of Discharge:  000228

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  01  06  11
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.1 (2)		Conduct:  4.2 (2)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  GCM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990412:	Medical evaluation by a military psychiatrist concluded that due to the severity of the applicant’s personality disorder his ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.

	AXIS I: Adjustment Disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct.
	
	AXIS II: Personality Disorder NOS with Avoidant and Borderline features.

991018:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder as evidenced by psychiatric evaluation.

991018:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

991018:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder as evidenced by psychological evaluation dated 990412.  The factual basis for this recommendation was LCpl T___'s personality disorder. 

000124:	Counseled and advised that you are being processed for administrative separation due to your diagnosed personality disorder.

000214:	GCMCA [CG, 1st MARDIV] directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) for convenience of the government due to a personality disorder.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 000228 general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a personality disorder (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).

Issue 1.  The applicant states his discharge is inequitable because it was based on one incident.  The Board does not agree that a medical diagnosis of personality disorder constitutes an “incident”.  While the applicant’s proficiency and conduct marks that were available for review by the Board indicate the applicant served in an honorable fashion, other factors mitigate against the applicant’s service being considered honorable.  The applicant stated on 1 Jan 00 that he could not stand his life as a Marine.  On 10 Jan 00, the applicant stated he would do anything to keep from deploying.  His Company Commander and First Sergeant considered the applicant a liability to his unit’s performance and threat to himself and fellow Marines.  Less than honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The applicant’s service was marred by his failure to adapt as a Marine.  The applicant’s conduct falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  

The applicant states it is unfair to be punished for a lifetime.  However, on 991018, the applicant was advised of his rights and probable characterization of service and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.  

The applicant states his exit physical characterized his psychiatric state as normal.  The Board found his separation physical, dated 000222, noted the applicant’s diagnosis of personality disorder.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore denied.

Issue 2.  The Veterans Administration 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.

Issue 3.  The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until Present.

B.  Table 6-1, Guide for Characterization of Service, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until Present.

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 “afls10.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