ex-, USMC
MD07-00329

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20070110 	 Characterization Received:  
Narrative Reason:  PERSONALITY DISORDER 				      Authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6203.3

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:  
			Narrative Reason change to: 
Applicant’s Issues:	1. Did not have personality disorder, suffered from stress from being assault victim
			2. Characterization should be based on pro/con marks.

Decision

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

Date:  20071011  				        Location:  Washington D.C.  

Discussion

Issue 1 ().  The Applicant was diagnosed on 20060131, by competent medical authority, with a personality disorder with a recommendation for expeditious administrative separation.  The Board found that the Applicant’s discharge was processed properly in accordance with applicable regulations.  The Applicant claims to this Board that he did not have a personality disorder, but rather was the victim of an assault by more senior members of his platoon, resulting in stress.  The Applicant submitted no medical evidence to counter the presumptively correct diagnosis of personality disorder, and therefore made no change to the Applicant’s basis for discharge.   The Board found no evidence in the record to support the Applicant’s contention of assault.  There is no evidence in his medical record that he sought medical treatment for injuries sustained from the alleged assault; and no evidence that he told anyone that he had been a victim of assault during his treatment for the perceived mental health issues.  Further, the Applicant did not raise the allegation in response to the notification of proposed administrative separation.  Not only is the government entitled to a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs, which the Applicant has not overcome; the Board believed it highly unlikely that had the Applicant made such an allegation to a medical officer or chaplain that it would have simply been ignored, as the Applicant implies it was, in contravention of established regulations and clear policy.  Relief denied on this issue.

Issue 2 ().  After review, the Board determined that the Separation Authority’s decision to characterize the Applicant’s service as general (under honorable conditions) was within his authority; therefore, it rejected the Applicant’s contention that his pro/con marks were dispositive of the issue.  However, the Board did determine that the characterization of the Applicant’s service as general (under honorable conditions) did not appear to be consistent with standards of naval discipline.  Normally, servicemembers involuntarily separated for a personality disorder receive an honorable characterization of service absent evidence of misconduct or poor performance in their service record.  There was no evidence in the Applicant’s service record of misconduct, and the Applicant’s pro/con marks did reflect an acceptable level of performance and conduct.  In light of those factors, and taking into account the very short period of service in which the Applicant served, the Board determined that there were not significant negative aspects of the Applicant’s service that outweighed the positive aspects of his service record.  Therefore, it determined that an honorable characterization of service was warranted. 

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 that  

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

	  “00  09  15”
	
The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. 

Summary of Service

Prior Service:  Inactive: USMCR (DEP)	20040709 - 20050626  		Active:   
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20050627		Years Contracted:  	Date of Discharge:  20060411
Length of Service:  00  Yrs  09  Mths  15  Dys	Lost Time:  Days UA:    Days Confined:  
Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  43	MOS:  0311  Highest Rank:  
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):	4.3(2)/4.3(2)	Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, RIFLE QUALIFICATION BADGE (MARKSMAN)

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

20060131:	Medical Record:  Reason for visit:  Psychiatric evaluation.
	Diagnosis:  Personality disorder, not otherwise specified, with immature features.
	Recommendation:  Expeditiously processed for an administrative discharge by reason of unsuitability.

Discharge Process

Date Notified:	20060308
Basis for Discharge:	 DUE TO  
Least Favorable Characterization:	
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:	

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:		20060308
Rights Elected at Notification:
	Consult with Counsel			
	Obtain Copies of Documents		
	Submit Statement(s) (date)			
	Administrative Board			

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):	 (20060308)
SJA review (date):	 (20060329)
Separation Authority (date):	CG, 2D MARINE DIVISION, II MEF (20060329)
              Basis for discharge directed:	 DUE TO 
              Characterization directed:	
Date Applicant Discharged:	20060411

Types of 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)  Letter from Member of Congress; Applicant letters from boot camp

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 2 September 2001 until Present.

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.

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