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

 ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD04-01212

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040722.  The Applicant requested the reason for the discharge be changed to “HARDSHIP.”  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list a representative on her DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041222.  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 reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain HONORABLE/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.  “I was involuntarily discharged after being diagnosed with a personality disorder.  I feel that I was misdiagnosed by the naval medical officer who made the diagnosis.  I contend that I never had a personality disorder, nor do I presently.  In October 2000 I took the MMPI-2 and it was reviewed by Dr. J. T-----S-----.  After evaluating me and reviewing the results of my MMPI-2, he found that I was well within the normal limits of the MMPI-2 and assessed me as not having a personality disorder.
      I am willing to retake the MMPI-2 and be evaluated at the present time in support of my contention that I was misdiagnosed and therefore improperly discharged from the USMC.
      The desired outcome of this review is to change the separation code, re-entry code, and the narrative reason for separation to reflect the truth regarding my discharge.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Character reference, dtd July 14, 2004
Psychological Evaluation (2 pages), dtd 10-04-2000

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   			None			HON
	Inactive: USMCR (J)		960715 - 960721	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  960722		Date of Discharge:  980515

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  09  24
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  16			AFQT:  85

Highest Rank:  LCpl			MOS:  2542 (Communications Center Operator)

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.4 (4)			Conduct:  4.5 (4)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

HONORABLE/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6203.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

961217:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Violation of ScolO 1700.4C by consuming alcohol in the student barracks.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

970829:	Reclassification from MOS 2800 to 2500 due to academic failure.

971001:	Medical evaluation by a military clinical psychologist concluded that “her ‘mood swings’ are too brief and unpredictable to be classified bipolar disorder.”

	AXIS I:  1.  Adjustment disorder with depressed mood
	               2.  Partner – relationship problems
	
	AXIS II:  No Dx at this time

	AXIS III:  Pregnant – 3rd trimester  

980211:	Medical evaluation by a military staff psychologist concluded that the Applicant’s personality disorder was “consistent with borderline personality.”

	AXIS I:  No diagnosis
	
	AXIS II:  Borderline personality disorder

980218:	Medical evaluation by a military psychologist concluded that the Applicant’s personality disorder was so severe that her ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.

980421:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge 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.

980421:	Commanding officer recommended discharge 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 and “a long-standing disorder of character and behavior which is of such severity as to interfere with (her) ability to function effectively in the military environment.” 

980421:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

980429:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Force Service Support Group] directed the Applicant's discharge 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 honorably discharged on 19980515 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 with a " Borderline Personality Disorder" by competent medical authority at the Mental Health Clinic, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune, NC, and was recommended for expeditious administrative separation from the Marine Corps.  The Board finds the Reason for Discharge reflects the Applicant's mental health status at the time of her discharge, and the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of issuance.  "Personality Disorder" is an accurate narrative description of the reason for the Applicant's discharge.  The contention the personality disorder no longer exists or has been overcome does not provide a legitimate basis to revise official records that were accurate at the time of issuance.

After a review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s characterization of discharge was appropriate.  Her contention that she was “misdiagnosed” and her subsequent post-service Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 and evaluation by a clinician were not sufficient to overturn a personality disorder diagnosed by a competent medical authority.  Relief denied.  

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support her claims at that time.  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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety. 

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		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