DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR: jdh
Docket No: 5189-08
28 August 2008

 

A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session,
considered your case on 5 August 2008 and recommended that your

naval record be corrected as set forth in the enclosed
proceedings dated 7 August 2008. However, in accordance with
current regulations, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Manpower and Reserve Affairs conducted an independent review of
the Board’s proceedings and by his memorandum of 25 August 2008,

a copy of which is enclosed, disapproved the Board’s
recommendation for corrective action.

You are advised that reconsideration of your case will be granted
only upon the presentation of new and material evidence not
previously considered by the Board and then, only upon the
recommendation of the Board and approval by the Assistant

Secretary.

I regret the circumstances of your case are such that favorable
action cannot be taken.

Sincerely,

LN a ©

W. DEAN PFEIFF
Executive Dire

 

Enclosures
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 5189-08

7 August 2008

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy

 

Subj}: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF

Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

 

Encl: (1) Case summary
(2) Subject's naval record

1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board
requesting a change in his RE-4 reenlistment code.

2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. MPa, aoe, 2d
MMe ceviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 5 August 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and

applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as

follows:

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b. Petitioner’s application to the Board was filed ina
timely manner.

c. Petitioner originally enlisted in the Marine Corps on 24
September 2004 at the age of 17. It appears that this enlistment
was terminated on two occasions because he failed the Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). Subsequently, he
enlisted in the Marine Corps Delayed Entry Program (DEP) and was
released on 18 July 2005. on 8 August 2005 Petitioner began a
period of active duty in the Marine Corps.
d. Petitioner’s medical record reflects that in January 2006
he was treated for an open fracture of his lower jaw, an injury
sustained after he had passed out during an inspection. He also
received treatment for pain in both of his knees after
complaining of such pain for more than 18 months.

e. During the period from 7 to 9 February 2006 Petitioner was
the subject of a psychiatric evaluation at a mental health unit
after a suicide attempt. He was diagnosed with an adjustment
disorder with a depressed mood, a dependent personality disorder,
fracture mandible syncopal episode, and family, occupational, and
financial stressors. Some of the key points of the psychiatric

report stated, in part, as follows:

(Patient) attempted to end his life; having suicidal ideations
for two months; absented himself because he felt he was going
to hurt someone; joined USMC to make father happy - was a poor
decision; does not like being told what to do - “tired of the
USMC”; feels drained; treated for depression one week ago and
prescribed Zoloft; admitted to psychiatric locked unit after
an overdose of Vicodin tabs; diagnosed: adjustment disorder
with a depressed mood, dependent personality disorder,
fracture mandible syncopal episode, family, occupational,

financial stressors

£f. On 10 February 2006 Petitioner received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence
(UA) and was awarded a $333 forfeiture of pay, and restriction
and extra duty for 14 days. At that time he was also counselled
regarding his misconduct. Shortly thereafter, on 13 February
2006, he received counselling regarding his diagnosed personality

and adjustment disorders.

g. On 24 February 2006 Petitioner was again counselled
regarding his personality and adjustment disorders and informed
that as a result of the diagnosis, he was being recommended for
an administrative separation. At that time a psychological
evaluation report detailing the findings of the 9 February 2006
psychiatric evaluation and the recommendation for an
administrative separation were forwarded to his commanding

officer for further action.

h. On 6 March 2006 Petitioner was notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of convenience of the
government due to a diagnosed personality disorder. He was
informed that the least favorable characterization of service he
could receive would be under honorable conditions and that he was
not recommended for retention or reenlistment. His commanding
officer recommended a general discharge in an expeditious manner

and stated, in part, as follows:
(Member) was diagnosed with a dependent personality disorder
on two separate occasions which renders him unsuitable for
continued and successful military service. He was recommended
for administrative separation because his disorder is so
severe that it will prevent him from successfully serving in

the future.

His long-standing disorder was brought to fruition out of
frustration of recovering from a broken jaw sustained during
the final week of recruit training. He absented himself
without authority due to thoughts of hurting himself or
someone else. Additionally, he has expressed suicide
ideations, made a suicide gesture by taking Vicodin,
experienced sleep difficulty, and been continually depressed
and drained of energy. He has stated numerous times that he
does not want to be a Marine and is tired of individuals
telling him what to do.

i. On 21 April 2006 Petitioner was discharged under honorable
conditions by reason of convenience of the government due to
personality disorder and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

j. In his application, Petitioner contends that he was
misdiagnosed with a personality and adjustment disorder and that
the Marine Corps made poor decisions based on his stress after he
had sustained a broken his jaw. Included with his application is
a letter from his mother which states that his discharge was
unjust. The letter is also a request for reenlistment of her son
in the Marine Corps now that he has matured.

k. An advisory opinion (AO) of 11 April 2007 from the
Headquarters Marine Corps (Code M&RA MMER/RE) recommends that
Petitioner’s request for a change of his RE-4 reenlistment code
be denied. In this regard, the AO points out that the code was
correctly assigned based on his overall record and qualification
for reenlistment at the time of his separation. The AO further
states, as follows:

(Member) was discharged by reason of personality disorder
and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code which indicates
that he was not recommended for reenlistment.... the record
indicates that he was counselled concerning a diagnosed
personality and adjustment disorder, unauthorized absence
and not being recommended for reenlistment.

l. An RE-4 reenlistment code is routinely assigned to a
Marine who is not recommended for retention or reenlistment and
is separated due to a diagnosed personality disorder, and the
record reflects suicidal and/or homicidal risks. A Marine may
also receive an RE-3C reenlistment code when it is directed by
the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC), or when the Marine is
ineligible for retention and the disqualifying factor is not
covered by another code. CMC authority is required for

reenlistment.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable

action.

The Board’s decision is based on Petitioner’s overall record and
the circumstances surrounding his diagnosed personality and
adjustment disorders, his desire to again serve in the Marine
Corps, and the character reference letter attesting to his

maturity and good post service conduct.

The Board concludes that despite the AO, Petitioner’s
reenlistment code should be changed to a more favorable code of
RE-3C. In this regard, the Board believes that his misconduct

and diagnosed personality and adjustment disorders were directly
related to his frustrations after he had broken his jaw. The
Board also believes that Petitioner has matured and should not
necessarily be prohibited from enlisting in the armed services
and notes that changing the code will not necessarily result in
his reenlistment, but will give him the opportunity to request
such action and authorize an evaluation of his fitness for

further service.

RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by showing that
on 21 April 2006 he was assigned an RE-3C reenlistment code, vice
the RE-4 reenlistment code actually issued on that date.

b. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating
to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed, or
completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such
entries or material be added to the record in the future.

c. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's
naval record be returned to the Board, together with a copy of
this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file
maintained for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a

part of Petitioner's naval record.
4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and

complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN J. GEORGE
Recorder Acting Recorder

5. The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your review
and action.

W. DEAN PFEIFFER

Reviewed and appyoved:

disaggrased>
S- 3VS- 08