ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20131203
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)	20001220 - 20010129  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20010130	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20020110	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Years    Months  11  Days
Education Level:  	AFQT:  62
MOS:  1833
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   () /  ()	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle 
 
Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJP:  		SCM:  		SPCM:  		CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20011019:	You recently made statements to a family psychologist and to the Battalion Hospitalman First Class that you frequently think of hurting or killing members of this command and often think of suicide.  These statements are based off of, in your opinion, that you have been neglected by your platoon leadership.  This is very serious and must be taken very seriously by this command.  Both of these statements are blatant violations of the UCMJ and to the good order and discipline of this command, as well as to the safety of each member of this command. 

- 20011130:	For being placed on limited duty for being in a depressed mood.  You have made statements in the past that you frequently think of hurting or killing members of this command and often think of suicide.  These statements are based off of, in your opinion, you have been neglected by your platoon leadership.  This is very serious and must be taken very seriously by this command.
 
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.  Paragraph 6203.3 CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 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.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	The Applicant contends his Narrative Reason for Separation of Personality Disorder on his DD Form 214 is improper.
2.	The Applicant contends he did not receive counseling stating that his Personality Disorder interfered with his ability to function in the military.
3.	The Applicant contends he accepted the separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service and Personality Disorder narrative reason without fully comprehending the ramifications due to youth and immaturity. 

Decision

Date:  20140612	     	Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

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

Discussion

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 Board 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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to  discharge and the discharge process to ensure  discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The Applicant’s record of service included  6105 counseling warnings but no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial.  Based on the Applicant’s diagnosis of a Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, with immature features by the 2nd Marine Division psychiatrist,  command administratively processed  for separation.  When notified of administrative separation processing using the  procedure, the Applicant   rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. 

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends his Narrative Reason for Separation of Personality Disorder on his DD Form 214 is improper.  The Applicant stated that he received a thorough psychological evaluation before entering the U.S. Marine Corps, there was no indication that he had a Personality Disorder, and a Personality Disorder is a congenital defect that is not caused by anything.  The Applicant contends his problems in service were the result of an isolated incident with his roommate, and he was not given psychological tests or observed over time, and this resulted in an improper Personality Disorder diagnosis.  The Applicant also cited his performance while at Marine Corps Recruit Training, Marine Combat Training, and MOS training.  A Personality Disorder is not a congenital defect but is a longstanding disorder of character, behavior, and adaptability that typically develops in the early teen years.  Pursuant to Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN) paragraph 6203.3, members may be processed for separation based on a mental health professional’s clinical diagnosis of a Personality Disorder when the disorder is so severe that one’s ability to function effectively and perform their duties is significantly impaired, and the individual poses a threat to the safety or well being of themselves or others.  On 19 October 2001 and 30 November 2001, the Applicant received retention warning counselings concerning homicidal and suicidal thoughts.  On 03 December 2001, the Division Psychiatrist for 2nd Marine Division diagnosed the Applicant with a Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, with immature features and recommended the requirement for a 6105 counseling be waived so that the Applicant could be expeditiously processed for administrative separation due to his unsuitability for continued military service.  The NDRB found no evidence, nor did the Applicant provide any, to indicate he was improperly diagnosed with a Personality Disorder.  Relief denied.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends he did not receive counseling stating that his Personality Disorder interfered with his ability to function in the military.  On 03 December 2001, the Applicant was recommended for expeditious separation due to his diagnosis of Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, with immature features by the Division Psychiatrist, 2nd Marine Division.  In accordance with paragraph 6203.3 of the MARCORSEPMAN, before initiating separation, the command must have counseled the Marine in accordance with paragraph 6105; given the Marine a reasonable opportunity to correct deficiencies; and have documentation of failure to correct those deficiencies.  

However, such counseling is not required if a psychiatrist or psychologist determines that the Marine is an immediate danger to himself or others.  Per the Division Psychiatrist’s letter of 03 December 2001, the Applicant exhibited suicidal and homicidal behavior, which rendered him unsuitable for further military service and warranted expeditious separation without the necessity of a 6105 counseling.  The NDRB determined the Applicant was properly separated in accordance with appropriate regulations.  Relief denied. 

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends he accepted the separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service and Personality Disorder narrative reason without fully comprehending the ramifications due to youth and immaturity.  The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation.  While the Applicant may feel he accepted the terms of his discharge due to his youth and immaturity, he merely waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and submit a written statement.  It was the decision of his command to process him for administrative separation, not the Applicant’s.  Accordingly, the characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation.  Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition.  Based on the Applicant’s record of service, which included below-average Proficiency and Conduct marks, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted.  Furthermore, the Applicant was properly separated for his Personality Disorder.  Relief denied.
 
Summary:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the Board found   Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall   and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .  The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of  discharge.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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