ex-CPL, USMC
MD07-00546

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20070313	Characterization Received:  
Narrative Reason:  PERSONALITY DISORDER 		Authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6203.3      

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:  
			Narrative Reason change to: 
Applicant’s Issues:	1.  One isolated incident which was not accurately recorded.

Decision

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

Date:  20071108		Location:  Washington D.C.	 Representation:  

Discussion

Issue 1 (Equity):  The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis.  If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order.  Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service.  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.  The NDRB reviewed all of the available records, supporting documents, facts, elements of discharge, evidence submitted by the Applicant, and circumstances unique to this case.  A particular circumstance of interest was the single case of nonjudicial punishment after a command investigation recommended counseling as appropriate action.  The NDRB noted that incident as the only blemish on the Applicant’s record and also noted the above average proficiency and conduct marks throughout the enlistment period.  The NDRB concluded that there was an inequity in the Applicant’s discharge action, is convinced that this was prejudicial to the Applicant, and therefore an inequity in the characterization did occur.  

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  

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)	19950924 - 19951105        		
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  19951106		Years Contracted:  4; Extension:  	Date of Discharge:  19990521      
Length of Service:  03 Yrs  06 Mths   16 Dys   	  Lost Time:  Days UA:           Days Confined:  
Education Level:  12	Age at Enlistment:  20	AFQT:  85	MOS:  7242          Highest Rank:  CPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):	4.4(8) / 4.2 (8)	 
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  SSDR, NDSM, RIFLE MARKSMAN BADGE       

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

19970131:	NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 117 – Wrongfully use provoking words.   
	Awarded - FOP ($150) for (2 months) suspended for 6 months; RIR (E-1) suspended for 6 months; Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).

19990303:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa, narrative summary for mental health hospital stay 19990303 – 19990309.  Was self referred for evaluation of suicidal ideations.  First contact with Mental Health.    
	Admitted suicidal thoughts and gestures since joining the Marine Corps.  
Diagnosis:  Axis I: Adjustment disorder, unspecified, Axis II: PD NOS with borderline and anti-social traits.
Recommendation:  Expeditious administrative separation.  Medically and psychologically fir but unsuitable for further military service.   

19990316:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Discussed Adsep Support Group and resources available.  Denied any suicidal or homicidal ideations and contracted for safety.       
	Diagnosis:  Axis I: Adjustment disorder, unspecified, Axis II: PD NOS with borderline and anti-social traits.
Recommendation:  Follow up.  

19990318:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa, Adsep Support Group:  Patient participated in group discussion and appeared to benefit from the involvement.  Mental status exam was within normal limits.  No evidence of any psychotic symptoms.  Denied any suicidal or homicidal ideations.       
	Recommendation:  Follow up on group therapy.  

19990324:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Follow up group therapy session.       
	Diagnosis:  Axis I: Occasional problems, Axis II: PD, NOS.       
	Recommendation:  Continued outpatient care.  Not homicidal or suicidal and is at low risk for self harm. 

19990331:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Follow up group therapy session.       
	Diagnosis:  Axis I: No change, Axis II: No change.       
	Recommendation:  Continued outpatient care for 6 more weeks.  Not homicidal or suicidal.  

19990407:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Individual visit.       
	Diagnosis:  PD, NOS with borderline and anti-social traits.       
	Recommendation:  Follow up on 19990414.  Not homicidal or suicidal and contracted for safety.  

19990414:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Individual visit.       
	Recommendation:  Group therapy.  Not homicidal or suicidal and contracted for safety.

19990415:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa, Adsep Support Group:  Patient participated in group discussion and appeared to benefit from the involvement.  Mental status exam was within normal limits.  No evidence of any psychotic symptoms.  Denied any suicidal or homicidal ideations.       
	Recommendation:  Follow up on group therapy.  

 19990421:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Follow up group therapy session.       
	Diagnosis:  Axis I: No change, Axis II: No change.       
	Recommendation:  Continued outpatient care for 2 more weeks.  Not homicidal or suicidal.
       
19990506:	Mental Health Clinic, USNH Okinawa:  Insight, judgment, impulse control appeared adequate.  Patient denied suicidal thoughts and contracted for safety.        
	Diagnosis:  PD NOS with borderline traits.       
	Recommendation:  Follow up.  

Discharge Process

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

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

Administrative Board Date:	     

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):	
SJA review (date):	
Separation Authority (date):	     
              Basis for discharge directed:	 
              Characterization directed:	 
Date Applicant Discharged:	19990521     

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)       

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until 31 August 2001.

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