ex-, USMC 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received:  20110329
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  
Authority for Discharge:  MARCORSEPMAN 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to: 
	Narrative Reason change to: 

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:	USMCR (DEP)	20040419 - 20041011  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20041012	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20060627	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  16  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  64
MOS:  0341
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   () /  ()	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle , Pistol , , , , , 

Periods of CONF:  

NJP:  
- 20050401:	Article  (UA 1745 – 2200 20050327)
	Article  (School of Infantry – consuming alcoholic beverages under the legal drinking age)
	Awarded:    Suspended:  

SCM:  	SPCM:  	CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20050401:	For absent without leave and underage consumption of alcohol

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed
Related to Military Service:
	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	
Related to Post-Service Period:
	Employment:		Finances:		Education/Training:	
	Health/Medical Records:		Rehabilitation/Treatment:		Criminal Records:	
	Personal Documentation:		Community Service:		References:	
	Department of VA letter:		Other Documentation:	
		Additional Statements:
	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	

Pertinent Regulation/Law
A.  Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 and Present, paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

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.

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

Applicant’s Issues

Decisional issues: The Applicant contends that his discharge characterization of service was unjust; he requested readjustment counseling upon return from a combat deployment and instead, he was discharged with a Personality Disorder and a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.

Decision

Date:  20110812	            	Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

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

Discussion

In accordance with U.S. Code, Title 10, Section 1553 (d)(1), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist .  In accordance with section 1553 (d) (2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution.

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge, if such change is warranted.  In reviewing discharges, the NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The NDRB 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 the standards of discipline of the Naval Service.  The Applicant submitted one decisional issue for the NDRB’s consideration.  Additionally, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of both equity and propriety.

The Applicant entered military service at age 19 without waiver to enlistment and induction standards.  The Applicant enlisted with a guaranteed contract for Infantry Option.  The military service record documents that he is a combat veteran, having served honorably during a combat deployment with a Marine Infantry Battalion in the Al-Anbar Province of Iraq in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM – September 2005 to February 2006 (Fallujah).  Additionally, the Applicant received the Combat Action Ribbon for his individual actions against opposing enemy forces and was assigned 4.4 proficiency and 4.4 conduct evaluation markings while deployed.  The Applicant’s official record of service includes one 6105 retention-counseling warnings and one Company Commander level nonjudicial punishment for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) while at the School of Infantry during enlisted entry level training accession pipeline.  The specific violations of the UCMJ, as charged, were Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) and Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order – underage consumption of alcohol).

The Applicant’s service records reflect a Post-Deployment Health Assessment dated 19 January 2006 (while still in theater) that indicated multiple traumatic stressors and a request for counseling regarding mental health issues related to his combat service.  The Applicant’s record indicates he was evaluated and treated while aboard Camp Fallujah (Iraq) on 03 Feb 2006 by appropriately credentialed mental health care providers who diagnosed the Applicant with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Chronic), Depressive Disorder (not otherwise specified), and Alcohol Dependence (with psychological dependence) in early remission.  Due to impending redeployment (11 Feb 2006), the Applicant was referred for follow-up care and treatment upon his return to Home Station with the Division Psychiatrist.  On 08 May 2006, the Applicant was diagnosed subsequently by the Division Psychiatrist with a Personality Disorder (not otherwise specified) with anti-social features and was recommended for an expeditious administrative separation in accordance with paragraph 6203.3 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN).  The NDRB reviewed the Applicant’s discharge package to ensure that he was properly discharged and was accorded all rights as required by the MARCORSEPMAN as related to the administrative discharge process.  In support of the Applicant’s contentions, he provided post-service medical documentation to include a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating decision and his most recent VA Compensation and Pension review exam.

Issue 1: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF WARRANTED.  The Applicant contends that his discharge characterization of service was unjust; he requested readjustment counseling upon return from a combat deployment and instead, he was discharged with a Personality Disorder and given a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.

The NDRB conducted a detailed review of the Applicant’s service record and medical records, including his post-service medical evaluations and his compensation and pension review evaluations - as documented by the VA.  The Applicant’s record reflects combat service with an in-service diagnosis of PTSD.  This diagnosis was confirmed, post service, by a separate clinical evaluation by the VA, who assigned a disability rating of 50 percent.  The VA rating was re-affirmed by another compensation and pension review since discharge.  The Applicant was separated administratively (after being diagnosed with PTSD) for a Personality Disorder.  Based on a review of the discharge documentation, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s discharge, at the time of discharge, was proper.  However, since the Applicant’s discharge, the Department of Defense has clarified the requirements for discharging service members with combat service under the provisions of a Convenience of the Government (Personality Disorder) discharge; any such action must address the existence of PTSD and any co-morbidity and be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) if co-morbidity exists.  Based on the unique circumstances related to the Applicant’s diagnosis of PTSD, coupled with the Personality Disorder discharge, and the post-service diagnosis and disability rating by the VA, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s discharge, though proper at the time of issuance, was inequitable.  
     
The MARCORSEPMAN states that characterization of service for a Marine separated under the provisions of paragraph 6203 (Convenience of the Government – Personality Disorder) is either Honorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions), as determined by the Marine’s service record, unless the Marine is in an entry level status.  An Honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standards of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate.  A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.  

After a thorough review of the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned an inequity in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge.  Based on the Applicant’s documentation and his official service and medical records, coupled with the facts and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that relief was both proper and warranted.  The NDRB voted unanimously that an upgrade in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge to Honorable was appropriate.  Additionally, the NDRB determined that the narrative reason for separation was not equitable; therefore, in the absence of any other proper narrative reason for separation, the NDRB determined that the reason for discharge shall be changed to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.  

Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,  and medical record entries, circumstances unique to this case, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that the discharge was not equitable.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall change to HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe 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:  After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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.  There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 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.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 other medical related reasons.  Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct:  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews.  Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.   The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate  in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 special 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.  The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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