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

 ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00549

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040210.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to San Antonio, TX.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. area.  The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041022.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.3

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “When I was Discharged from the Marine Corps in 1996; I was only 20 yrs old and at the time of discharge there were many things going on in my life that at 20 I did not know how to deal with.  My grandmother was ill in California.  It was the first time I was away from home and my engagement to my fiancée had failed because I was so far away from home.  Instead of seeking help I did whatever was nessary for me to get home.

I received a general under honorable condition discharge it was convince of the Government Due to Personality Disorders.  Today I am 27 yrs old a father a full time student in college pursuing a degree in Drug and Alcohol Abuse Counseling I am of sane mind and would like to have an Honorable Discharge to help my education, life and to be able to tell my children where they could be proud of me.”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		940531 - 940822	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940823		Date of Discharge:  960426

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  04
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  33

Highest Rank:  PFC			MOS:  1833

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.6 (5)			Conduct:  3.4 (5)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, LoA

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

950216:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to PFC for the month of February 1995 because of lack of characteristic traits to the grade appointed.

950305:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Willful self infliction of bodily harm by over ingestion of “stimulant” medication, fabrication of facts and expression of suicidal ideation.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

950601:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to PFC for the month of June 1995 because of PFT failure on 950527.

950615:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Apathetic attitude and lack of initiative to maintain the minimum acceptable physical fitness standards.  Specifically, fell out of a BN Run and subsequently failed a PFT.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

950712:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to PFC for the month of July 1995 because of lack of initiative, attitude, and physical fitness standards.

960116:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91:
Specification: Treat with disrespect in language toward Corporal by saying to him “you stupid idiot” on 951229.
Awarded forfeiture of $435.00 per month for 2 months, correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to E-1 (all suspended for 6 months).  Not appealed.

960312:	Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO’s NJP dated 960116.

960402:	Medical evaluation by a military psychiatrist concluded that the Applicant’s personality disorder was so severe that his ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.  Applicant posed a chronic risk for suicidal or homicidal behavior.
	AXIS I: Passive-aggressive personality disorder.

960402:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder as evidenced by psychiatric evaluation.

960402:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation and to make a statement.

960402:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder as evidenced by psychological evaluation.  The factual basis for this recommendation was Naval Hospital Psychiatrist’s letter dated 960402.

960415:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

960422:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Marine Division MarForLant, Camp Lejeune, NC] directed the Applicant's discharge general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a personality disorder.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19960426 with a general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a personality disorder (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

Issue 1.  The Applicant was diagnosed to possess a personality disorder by a competent medical authority.  His condition rendered him unfit for further service.  When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion and adverse counseling entries on other occasions.  The Applicant’s conduct evaluation average, which is below the standard required for an honorable discharge, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration 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.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an inequity or impropriety must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such inequity or impropriety occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate his misconduct sufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

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.  Table 6-1, Guide for Characterization of Service, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until Present.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “afls14.jag.af.mil”.  

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:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023