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

 ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00100

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021016, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing review before a traveling panel closest to Napa, CA.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a record (documentary) review prior to any personal appearance hearing; and further advised that the NDRB does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington National Capital Region. 

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20030912.  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 submitted

1.  My Mother had cancer while I was stationed in Japan and I was depressed being so far away from her.  I had regular contacts with the base CO and I called him one night at home when I found out about my Mom.  I asked him if there was anyway I could get out early so I could take care of her or at least be with her.  He said I couldn’t get a humanitarian discharge because my Father was living with her and he could take care or her.  He said the only way to get out early would be to get a recommendation from either a Navy Chaplain or Navy counselor.  So I went to go see both.  They sent a request for separation to the General in Okinawa.   When the separation paperwork came back to Iwakuni, it was a General discharge, with an RE-4 cord and the narrative reason for separation was personality disorder.  It was explained to me that because the recommendation was from a counselor the separation code would be HFX1, Personality disorder.   I don’t have nor have I ever had a personality disorder and to have that on my DD-214 is not fair.  I have graduated from the Police Academy in California and want to re-enlist as a reservist but can’t start either until this is changed.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Applicant’s letter to the Board dtd Jan 21, 2003 (3 pages)
Applicant’s Résumé 
Applicant’s Individual Achievement from NVC Police Academy dtd Nov 30, 2001
Certificate of Graduation (Basic Law Enforcement Academy), Napa Valley College Criminal Justice Training Center, dtd 8 Dec 2001
Membership Certificate, 600 Club (Physical Agility Test), Napa Valley College Criminal Justice Training Center, dtd Jul 23, 2001
Certificate of Individual Record of Training, California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Basic Police Academy, Napa Valley College Criminal Justice Training Center, Jul 7 through Dec 8, 2001
Certificate of Completion, Chemical Agents For Peace Officers, Napa Valley Criminal Justice Training Center, dtd Aug 2, 2001
Certificate of Lifetime Fitness Award, 600 Club, Basic Police Academy Class #47, Napa Valley College, dtd Dec 8, 2001
Vehicle Insurance Identification Card, expiration date of Dec 21, 2002
Social Security Identification Card
Maine Hunter Safety & Conservation Program Identification Card dtd Sep 18, 1994
Summary of Applicant’s Military Courses
CG, MCB, Camp Smedley D. Butler, Okinawa, Separation Authority, ltr of Jun 2, 2000
Copy of DD Form 214 (Copy #1)
Portion of Course Transcript dtd Jul 7, 2000
Certificate of Birth, State of New Hampshire, dtd Aug 2, 1980
Applicant Photo, Criminal Justice Training Center

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		981028 - 990104	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990105		Date of Discharge:  000619

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  05  15
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  5

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  86

Highest Rank:  PFC

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.1 (Unknown)			Conduct:  3.9 (Unknown)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR, Rifle Expert Badge

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:

981027:	Minimum educational standard of attendance through grade 10 waived.

991213:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [specifically on 25 Oct 99, violated MCASO P5560.8 by driving a POV without a SOFA license].  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  Applicant elected to make a statement.

991216:	Applicant’s Rebuttal Statement contained in service record book.

000111:	Branch Medical Clinic, Iwakuni, Japan, Psychological Eval:  Pt is 19 year old Caucasian male with approx 1 year of continuous active duty.  His OIC referred the pt after the pt was crying in the office.  Chief Compliant:  “I’ve been upset and unhappy with the Marines for sometime.”  Pt arrived in Japan on 3 Sep 99 and has had difficulties at his unit since he arrived.  Occupational difficulties are manifest by being UA several times, receiving a Page 11 for driving without a SOFA license, and decreasing attention to detail at work (i.e., his observation ratings has fallen below 98%).  The pt has also experienced interpersonal troubles.  He has had problems interacting with members of this unit and he has told NCOs and SNCOs that he “frequently lies to them.”  This information was obtained from the pt’s OIC, CWO S_.
	Impression:  Pt reports symptoms consistent with alcohol dependence and personality disorder.  Pt has a long history of trouble with authority and being self-centered.
	Diagnosis:
	AXIS I:   Alcohol Dependence.
	AXIS II:  Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified with Anti-Social & Narcissistic Personality Traits.
	Recommendation:  
1.  Pt is found psychologically fit for normal duty.
2.  In professional opinion, PFC T_ (Applicant) is unsuitable for continued military service.
3.  There are no psychiatric contradictions to any admin, disciplinary, or legal actions deemed necessary by the parent command.
4.  Treatment plan for PFC T_ (Applicant) is routine individual therapy and crisis intervention services as necessary.  
5.  Returned to command recommended service member should not have excessive responsibilities and the service member should not have access to weapons and Applicant should be processed for admin separation due to unsuitability.  Although he does not have a severe mental disorder and is not considered mentally disordered, he manifests a disorder of character, behavioral and adaptability that are of such severity to preclude adequate military service.  Due to his continued emotional distress, and lifelong pattern of maladaptive responses to routine personal and work-related stressors, he can be expected to continue to have behavioral and emotional difficulties.  

000124:	Acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for month of Feb 2000 due to recent 6015 dtd 991213.

000215:	Branch Medical Clinic, Iwakuni, Japan, Psychological Eval:  Pt referred by his Sergent Major for psychological eval.  Chief Complaint:  “I’ve been upset and unhappy with the Marines for sometime.”  Pt first seen on 11 Jan 00 and diagnosed with a personality disorder.  Since this eval the pt has had continued difficulties with his peers and authority figures at work.  These difficulties have included verbal and physical altercations with peers and failing to obey lawful orders of superiors.
	Impression:  Pt reports symptoms consistent with alcohol dependence and personality disorder.  Pt has a long history of trouble with authority and being self-centered.
	Diagnosis:
	AXIS I:   Alcohol Dependence.
	AXIS II:  Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified with Anti-Social & Narcissistic Personality Traits.
	Recommendation:  Unsuitable for military service.  Returned to command. Recommend service member should not have excessive responsibilities and the service member should not have access to weapons and Applicant should be processed for admin separation due to unsuitability.  Although he does not have a severe mental disorder and is not considered mentally disordered, he manifests a disorder of character, behavioral and adaptability that are of such severity to preclude adequate military service.  Due to his continued emotional distress, and lifelong pattern of maladaptive responses to routine personal and work-related stressors, he can be expected to continue to have behavioral and emotional difficulties.  There are no psychiatric contradictions to any admin, disciplinary or legal actions deemed necessary by parent command.  

000303:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Did, on 12 Feb 00 without authority, absent himself from his unit at which he was required to be, to wit: MCAS located at Iwakuni, Japan and did remain so absent until 12 Feb00.
Awarded reduction to pay grade E-1 (suspended for 6 months), forfeiture of $502.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 45 days.  Not appealed.

000316:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [personality disorder as diagnosed on 15 Feb 00 after recent incidents of difficulty managing routine stressors, interacting with authority and ability to function effectively in the military environment has become significantly impaired].  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

000403:	Branch Medical Clinic, Iwakuni, Japan, Psychological Evaluation:  Service Member was first seen on 11 Jan 00 and diagnosed with a personality disorder.  Since this evaluation the Pt has had continued difficulties with his peers and authority figures at work.  These difficulties have included verbal and physical altercations with peers and failing to obey lawful orders of superiors.  See psychological evals of 11 Jan 00 and 15 Feb 00 for further details.  Weight, sleep and appetite are mildly disturbed.  Occupational performance, relationships, and self-esteem/self-confidence are reported as reduced over the past 4-6 months.  Symptoms consistent with psychotic disorders, eating disorders, anxiety disorders, sleeping disorders. Somatoform disorders, dissociative disorders and adjustment disorders were denied.  
Impression:  Pt reports symptoms consistent with alcohol dependence and personality disorder.  Pt has a long history of trouble with authority and being self-centered.
	Diagnosis:
	AXIS I:   Alcohol Dependence.
	AXIS II:  Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified With Anti-Social & Narcissistic Personality Traits.
	Recommendations:  1.  In my professional opinion, Pt is unsuitable for continued military service.  2.  Pt is returned to his command with the following recommendations:  a.  Precautions – Pt should not have excessive responsibilities and the service member should not have access to weapons.  b.  Future Active duty service – Pt should be processed for admin separation due to unsuitability.  Although he does not have a severe mental disorder and is not considered mentally disordered, he manifests a disorder of character, behavioral and adaptability that are of such severity to preclude adequate military service.  Due to his continued emotional distress, and lifelong pattern of maladaptive responses to routine personal and work-related stressors, he can be expected to continue to have behavioral and emotional difficulties.  3.  There are no psychiatric contradictions to any admin, disciplinary or legal actions deemed necessary by the parent command.  4.  The treatment plan is routine individual therapy and crisis intervention services as necessary.  5.  This plan and diagnosis were discussed with pt.  He understands the diagnosis and plan, its provisions, and concurs with the above. 

000424:	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 psychological evaluation.

000425:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

000503:	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.  The factual basis for this recommendation was Applicant’s demonstrated performance and conduct supports the Psychologist’s opinion that his disorder is so severe that he is unable to function effectively in a military environment. 

000531:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact. 

000602:	GCMCA [CG, MCB, Camp Smedley D. Butler, Okinawa] 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 20000619 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 with a personality disorder on three separate occasions by competent medical authorities.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  The Board does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition and implied incorrect diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to warrant an upgrade to his characterization of service.  Relief denied.

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, adverse counseling entries on other occasions, and a conduct evaluation average below the standard required for an honorable characterization of service.  The Applicant’s conduct, 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 would be inappropriate.  It must be noted that most Marines serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.   In fairness to those Marines, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due.  Relief denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity 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, to enhance employment opportunities, or for 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 Present.

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