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

 ex-Pvt, USMC  
Docket No. MD03-00268

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021203, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to medical condition Schzophrenic/Paronoid Affective disorders.  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 20031017.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  I was dischared due to being AWOL and behavior which was a result of my mental condition  While in the service I developed a mental condition which had not been apparent when I joined the military.  I believe I was incorrectly diagnosed with personality disorders.  Because of the stress.  I was going through and my mental condition.  I was to be separated by administrative discharge  I had gone AWOL because I believe I was going to be locked up - paranoia  I was suicidal at the time as my military records show.  I don’t believe I was in the correct mental condition while under going a court martial to make decisions and think clearly what was best for me.
My condition was really schizophrenia and I was probated and diagnosed as such later.
As I was misdiagnosed and I don’t feel I was adequately counselled & represented due to my condition which has progressed.  I respectfully request that I be granted an upgrade of my discharge and one that is appropriate to my mental condition which began while in the service or was brought on by the stress and continued to get worse. 

2.  On 5/15/96 I was not represented by council.

Glads Matos for (Representative payee)”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Twenty-nine pages from Applicant’s medical record
Twenty-three pages from Psychiatric Emergency Services, St. Vincent Charity Hospital
Doctor’s statement, dated November 5, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR (J)		951017 - 951024	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  951025		Date of Discharge:  970709

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  15	(Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  35

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  0.0 (1)			Conduct:  0.0 (1)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  72

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

BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

951016:	Applicant briefed upon and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.

960223:	NAVHOSP Camp Lejeune NC (SF 600):  Difficulty adjusting to USMC.  Joined USMC to escape family problems.  Joined on a “whim” after fighting with girlfriend.  Now wants to reconcile things with her and get out of USMC.

960304:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence from 1300, 960220 to 1500, 960222 (2 days/surrendered).
Awarded forfeiture of $218.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duties for 14 days.  Forfeiture suspended for 6 months.  Not appealed.

960304:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Your recent NJP held on 960304 for violation of Article(s) 86 of the UCMJ.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

960304:	Mental Health Clinic, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune:  Recommendation for Administrative Separation; Case of Pvt H------.  AXIS II:  Personality disorder, not otherwise specified, with borderline and dependent features so severe that his ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.  Does not require and will not benefit from psychiatric hospitalization.

960418:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 1800, 960311.

960423:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 1530, 960421 (41 days/appre-hended).

960514:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
	Specification: Unauthorized absence from 1300, 960311 to 1500, 960422 (41 days/apprehended).
	Finding: to Charge I and the specification thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: Forfeiture of $583.00.
	CA action 960514:  Sentence approved and ordered executed.

960604:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:
Specification: Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 112A:
Specification: Tested positive for THC, a controlled substance, according to NAVDRUGLAB message R 090712Z May 96.
Awarded forfeiture of $400.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days.  Not appealed.

960605:	Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO’s NJP dated 960304.

960605:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [NJP held 4 Jun 96 for violation of article 112a of the UCMJ, specifically, my illegal drug usage as was verified in NAVDRUGLAB Msg R 0907122 May 96, for positive testing of THC, a controlled substance.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

960710:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0200, 960702.

960805:	Applicant to confinement.

960805: 	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0001, 960802 (29 days/appre-hended).

960910:	Special Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
	Specification 1:Unauthorizefd absence from 0200, 960702 to 0001, 960802 (29 days/apprehended).
	Charge II:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A:
	Specification: Wrongfully use cocaine between 960601 to 960611.
	Findings: to Charge I and II and specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: Forfeiture of $583.00 per month for 4 months, confinement for 120 days, and a bad conduct discharge.
	CA 961210:  Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD.

961015:	Applicant from confinement.

961016:	To appellate leave.

970415:	NMCCMR:  Affirmed findings and sentence.

970709:	SSPCMO:  Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970709 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by special court-martial that was determined to be legal and proper by appellate review authority.  The sentence was affirmed and ordered executed (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 the Applicant’s issue 1, the Board found the documentation and statements provided by the Applicant were not sufficient to overturn the presumption that he was properly diagnosed by a competent medical authority at the Mental Health Clinic, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune, NC, on 4 Mar 1996 with a "Personality Disorder, not otherwise specified, with borderline and dependent features."  There was no compelling evidence reviewed that persuaded the Board this diagnosis and the Applicant’s subsequent Special Court-Martial for his unauthorized absence (29 days) and his wrongful use of a controlled substance (cocaine) was improper or inequitable.  Relief denied.

Further per regulation, the NDRB presumes the established facts stated in the court-martial are relevant and material facts.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB found the Applicant’s service record devoid of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded.  Relief denied.

The NDRB recognizes that serving in the Marine Corps is very challenging.  
Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted most Marines serve honorably and well thereby earning honorable discharges.   In fairness to those Marines, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due.  While the NDRB respects the fact that the Applicant had “family problems,” his service has been equitably characterized.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 950818 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 86, unauthorized absence and Article 112a, wrongful use, possession, etc., of a controlled substance.

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