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

 
ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD04-00948

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040517.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

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

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 12a, Date Entered AD This Period, should read:  "99 10 13” vice “99 12 18."  The Commandant, Headquarters USMC, Quantico, VA, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

No issues were submitted by the Applicant. 

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (-1 and -4)
VA Statement in support of claim

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		990923 - 991012	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  991013		Date of Discharge:  010709

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  27  (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  65

Highest Rank:  PFC			MOS:  1833

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  3.3 (6)			Conduct:  3.3 (7)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  LA

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  66

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:

001128:	Discharged from NMC San Diego following an impulsive suicide gesture on 001126.  Recommended administrative separation.

	AXIS I:  Partner relational problem
	
	AXIS II:  Personality Disorder NOS with Borderline and Dependent features

001128:	In hands of civilian authorities (IHCA) (From SRB, page 3).

001202:	From IHCA, to duty.

001207:	Battalion Surgeon recommended that Applicant be administratively separated due to his multiple mental health evaluations and admission to NMC San Diego for three days after ingesting 20-30 Vicodin on 001126.

001212:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [UA at 0530, 001205 and from 1330, 001211 to 0630, 001212.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

010423:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Personality disorder.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

010424:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 010119 to 010322.  Violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs):
Specification 1: Going to Mexico without an out of bounds chit.
Specification 2: Consumed alcohol under the legal age while in Tijuana, Mexico.
Awarded forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to Pvt.  Not appealed.

010503:	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.  Recommended expeditious administrative separation.

	AXIS I:  None
	
	AXIS II:  Personality Disorder NOS with Cluster B features

010618:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder as evidenced by psychiatric evaluation.  Notified the least favorable characterization possible was under other than honorable conditions.

010618:	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.

010618:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder.

010629:	GCMCA [CG, 1st MARDIV (Rein)] directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 20010709 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).

The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.  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.  In addition, the Applicant’s conduct evaluation average, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate.  Relief denied.

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 is evident 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.  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