Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00673
Original file (MD01-00673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD01-00673

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010409, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge 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 010928. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was three to two 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
1. My discharge was inequitable in that my character of service is based on one incident which was proven to be just that, an incident. As stated in my letter (Document #2) my action stemmed from homesick, not a desire to hurt the Corps. I feel and believe others do as well (Documents #1 and #2) that I proved myself to be dependable and loyal to my service. I regret that I did not handle my situation better but to be punished for a lifetime when I've shown my desire to excel simply seems unfair. I have made application to enlistment into the West Virginia Army National Guard, pending an R E Code: 4 waiver. My exit physical characterizes my psychiatric state as normal.
2. If my Character of Service were changed to Honorable, I would be able to use my MGIB which I paid my full share. I can live without the MGIB but I feel the General under Honorable Condition Discharge coupled with an RE Code of 4 label me as a misfit and I truly don't feel I deserve such a burden when I proven I'm better than that.
3. If you would carefully review the documents I've submitted, taking note of the dates that prove my reversal of that incident I would be forever in your debt. I apologize that my actions probably did cause other grief, yet I am the one who bears the permanent burden, and for that I beseech you to review and change my Character of Service as well as the RE Code.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letters of Recommendations (3)
Letter from Applicant
 Copies of DD Form 214 (3)
 Copy of Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal Certificate
Copies from Medical Record (2pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                970915 - 980817  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980818               Date of Discharge: 000228
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 01 06 11
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 42

 Highest Rank: LCpl
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.1 (2)              Conduct: 4.2 (2)
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM

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 :


990412:  Medical evaluation by a military psychiatrist concluded that due to the severity of the applicant’s personality disorder his ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.
         AXIS I: Adjustment Disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct.
        
         AXIS II: Personality Disorder NOS with Avoidant and Borderline features.
991018:  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.
991018:          Applicant advised of his 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.
991018:  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 as evidenced by psychological evaluation dated 990412. The factual basis for this recommendation was LCpl T___'s personality disorder.

000124:  Counseled and advised that you are being processed for administrative separation due to your diagnosed personality disorder.

 000214:  GCMCA [CG, 1 st MARDIV] 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 000228 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 states his discharge is inequitable because it was based on one incident. The Board does not agree that a medical diagnosis of personality disorder constitutes an “incident”. While the applicant’s proficiency and conduct marks that were available for review by the Board indicate the applicant served in an honorable fashion, other factors mitigate against the applicant’s service being considered honorable. The applicant stated on 1 Jan 00 that he could not stand his life as a Marine. On 10 Jan 00, the applicant stated he would do anything to keep from deploying. His Company Commander and First Sergeant considered the applicant a liability to his unit’s performance and threat to himself and fellow Marines. Less than honorable conditions 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. T he applicant’s service was marred by his failure to adapt as a Marine . The applicant’s conduct falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.

The applicant states it is unfair to be punished for a lifetime. However, on 991018, the applicant was advised of his rights and probable characterization of service 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.

The applicant states his exit physical characterized his psychiatric state as normal. The Board found his separation physical, dated 000222, noted the applicant’s diagnosis of personality disorder.
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.
Issue 2. 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.
Issue 3. The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice 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, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He 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. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.




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 “ afls10.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      


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00351

    Original file (MD01-00351.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) Letter from Member of Congress and Naval Council of Personnel Boards response PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 990111 - 990201 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 990202 Date of Discharge: 000120 Length of Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00128

    Original file (MD02-00128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My understanding at the time of my discharge was that after six months my General discharge would automatically be upgraded to Honorable! Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Applicant's General Discharge Certificate PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 970920 - 980719 COG Period...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01059

    Original file (MD04-01059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 6203.3 PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I talked to a VA. Representative, she said I might not be able to get reimbursement for school because I got a General discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00234

    Original file (MD04-00234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant is not mentally ill.AXIS I: Adjustment disorder (unspecified) AXIS II: Personality disorder not otherwise specified with Cluster B features. 990412: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 990510: 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 as evidenced by psychological evaluation.

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00145

    Original file (MD00-00145.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980805: 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 as evidenced by psychological evaluation. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board, by a vote of 3 to 2, found that the discharge was not proper (D and E).The Board agrees with the applicant’s issue that his service,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00353

    Original file (ND00-00353.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00353 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper but inequitable (C and D).In response to the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant was processed and ultimately discharged from the Navy for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01421

    Original file (MD03-01421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Conditions (GUHC) to that of Honorable. (f) (1).As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00037

    Original file (MD02-00037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thanks 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: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960703 Date of Discharge: 9904?? 990412: GCMCA [Commander, Marine Forces Reserve] directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00612

    Original file (MD00-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    6203.3 PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper but inequitable (D and E).The NDRB found the applicant’s issue non decisional. The Board, however, reviewed the applicant’s service record and found, based on her proficiency and conduct marks that her overall service warranted an Honorable discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00560

    Original file (MD01-00560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 21 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 49 Highest Rank: LCpl Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Proficiency: 4.4 (3) Conduct: 4.1 (3) Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM Days of Unauthorized Absence: None Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Condition not a physical disability, Personality Disorder (without administrative discharge...