ex-, USMC
MD07-00037
  
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20061006		Characterization of Service:  GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS
Narrative Reason:  PERSONALITY DISORDER	Discharge Authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6203.3

Applicant’s Request:	
	Characterization change to: 		
	Narrative Reason change to: 		
	Review Requested:			
	Representation:  				
	
Applicant’s Issues (as summarized by NDRB):
1.  Did not have a personality disorder 

Decision

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

Date:  20070823  	Location:  Washington D.C.  The Board found that 

Discussion

Issue 1 ().  The documentation and statements provided by the Applicant were not sufficient to overturn the presumption that the Applicant was properly diagnosed with a personality disorder.  The Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by a competent medical authority.  The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation were improper or inequitable.  Even the Applicant’s supporting documentation from Dr. A_, disputing the diagnosis, acknowledges that the diagnosis “arguably may be correct.”  Nothing in the record, nor in the Applicant’s petition, sufficiently demonstrates that the diagnosis, based on a number of evaluations over a period of several months, was erroneous so as to make his discharge on that basis improper.  Regarding his characterization of service, the Board noted that the Applicant’s service record also supported misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions and/or due to a pattern of misconduct as a basis for discharge.  Had the Applicant been processed in strict compliance with applicable regulations, he would have been processed for both misconduct (thus exposing him to a possible characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions) and personality disorder.  Had misconduct as a basis for discharge been found to be supported by the evidence, regulations provide that it would be the appropriate basis even when a personality disorder exists.  In light of his documented violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 and his professional incompetence, the Board did not find the characterization of Applicant’s service as general (under honorable conditions) to be inequitable.

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.  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)  20010622 - 20010812  	Active:   
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  20010813	Years Contracted:  ; Extension:    	Date of Discharge:  20031003
Length of Service:  02  Yrs  01  Mths  21  Dys  (does not exclude lost time)	Lost Time:    	
Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  74	MOS:  0151	Highest Rank:  
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):  NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Awards and Decorations (per DD Form 214):  NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, RIFLE QUALIFICATION BADGE (MARKSMAN)

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

20020409:	Medical Entry:  Reason for visit:  difficulty falling asleep for many years
	Diagnosis:  Insomnia, General Anxiety Disorder
	Recommendation:  Mental Health consult, Trazadone…, Sleep Hygiene Measures, Follow up after MH.

20020730:	MARCORSEPMAN para 6105 counseling for failing to be at appointed place of duty on time on 20020708 and 20020709.

20020827:	NJP -- viol UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence 0701, 20020808 to 0815, 20020808.  
	Award:  FOP $289.00 for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  Not appealed.

20021002:	MARCORSEPMAN para 6105 counseling for repeated violations of Article 86 on 20020918 and 20020924.

20021003:	MARCORSEPMAN para 6105 counseling for technical incompetence--failure to become proficient or capable of performing the duties and tasks prescribed for MOS in present grade, and failure to exhibit judgment, integrity, military presence and bearing, reliability, obedience and self discipline.

20030702:	Counseled for absent without leave on 20030627, more than one hour late to appointed place of duty.  

20030811:	Department Head, Mental Health Unit, recommended to Commanding Officer, Support Battalion, MCRD PI, expeditious administrative separation for convenience of the government due to personality disorder.
	Diagnosis: Personality disorder not otherwise specified with obsessive compulsive features.
	Recommendation:  Expeditious administrative separation is strongly recommended…(Applicant) poses a significant and continuing threat of harming himself and others if retained…

Elements of Discharge:  [INVOLUNTARY]

Date Notified:	20030821
Basis for Discharge:	 DUE TO:  
Least Favorable Characterization:	
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:	

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:	20030821
Rights Elected at Notification:
	Consult with Counsel			
	Obtain Copies of Documents		
	Submit Statement(s) (date)			
	Administrative Board			

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):	 (20030821)
SJA review (date):	 (20030918)
Separation Authority (date):	CG, MCRD/ERR, PARRIS ISLAND, SC (20030918)
              Basis for discharge directed:	 DUE TO  
              Characterization directed:	
Date Applicant Discharged:	20031003

Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Related to Military Service:	Service and/or Medical Record:  		Other Records:  

Related to Post-Service Period:  	
	Employment:  			Finances:  			Education: 		
	Health/Medical Records:  		Substance Abuse:			Criminal Records:  	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:  		References:  		
	
Additional Statements From Applicant:  	From Representative:    
Other Documentation (Describe)       

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 02 September 2001 until Present.

B.  Paragraph 6203, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 02 September 2001 until Present.

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 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 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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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.  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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.”  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.  

Automatic Upgrades - 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 Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 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.  

Board Membership:  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:

				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