Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500819
Original file (MD0500819.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD05-00819

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050407. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the Disabled American Veterans.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051117. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that the characterization of the Applicant’s service was inequitable. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6214.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“BEFORE MY DISCHARGE, MY ENVIRONMENT ON BASE, WAS HOSTILE. MY SUPERIORS WERE COMPLETELY AGAINST ME. I DO NOT, TO THIS DAY, KNOW WHY BUT THEY HATED ME. THEY PICKED ON ME ON A DAILY BASIS. IT WAS NOT A “NEW GUY” RIVALRY, IT WAS BLATANT HATRED. I WAS A GOOD MARINE. I LOVED THE MARINE CORPS. I FEEL THAT I WAS FORCED OUT. MY RECORDS WILL SHOW THIS. WHEN I WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT AND PUT INTO A NEW DUTY ASSIGNMENT (SAFETY ADMIN) EVERYTHING WAS GREAT. WHEN I WAS PUT BACK INTO THE HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT, EVERYTHING WENT BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS. MY RECORDS WILL PROVE THIS.

MY NCO’S WOULD PICK ON ME. THEY WOULD HUNT ME DOWN AND BEAT THE HELL OUT OF ME IN THE BACK OF THE MOTORPOOL. WHILE I’M LAYING IN THE WATER, THEY WOULD LAUGH AT ME. THEY GOT A KICK OUT OF ABUSING THEIR AUTHORITY. WHEN I WOULD REPORT THESE INCIDENTS TO MY C.O. (LT. R_) HE WOULD TELL ME TO QUIT WHINING AND THAT I WAS DRIPPING BLOOD AND WATER IN HIS OFFICE SPACE. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WAS DONE. AGAIN, I HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO LEAVE THE MARINES. THIS IS ONLY ONE OF MANY DAILY “RITUALS” THAT I ENDURED.

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (Disabled American Veterans):

 “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 the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for an upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Conditions Discharge to that of Honorable.

The FSM served from January 6, 1998 to October 26, 1999 at which time he was discharged due to a Personality Disorder.

The FSM contends that prior to his discharge his environment on base was a hostile one. He was harassed, beaten, belittled, on a daily basis. He felt that his entire Command was against him and that the environment was completely hostile. He also notes that after one of the events were he was beaten down into the water and mud at the rear of the Motor Pool he was laughed at and ridiculed by the NCO’s that had committed the violent act. When reporting the incident to the Commanding Officer Lt. R_, he was told to quit whining and get out of the office because he was bleeding and dripping water in his office space.

 A review of the record reflects no negative counseling for poor performance or behavior, it does show treatment for psychiatric ideations. Ideations of such severity that it was determined that the FSM was medically unfit for retention in the Marine Corps. Navy and Marine Corps. Regulations state in part that when a service member is deemed unfit for continued service due to a personality disorder that character of service at discharge is dependent upon the character of the individuals’ service and that each case must be evaluated separately. In this case, there is no evidence of misconduct, but there is evidence of harassment supported vaguely by the medical reports. Which provides some level of reasonable plausibility that the FSM has provided a factual statement of a hostile environment.
Based on this service’s review of the record, we contend the discharge is not proper at this time, nor was it proper at the time of separation, based on military regulations.

This creates a need for a review of the application of the standard, for the Board to determine that the Applicant’s discharge is improper. The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances of the case presented before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. See SECNAVIST 5420.174D, Sect. 407, part 3.

As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174D.

We ask for the Board’s careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision. These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the Applicant.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.”
Documentation
Only the service record book and medical record were reviewed. The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19970125 - 19980125      COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19980126             Date of Discharge: 19991026

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 01 09 01
          Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

 Age at Entry: 17 (Parental Consent)

 Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 40

 Highest Rank: LCpl                                  MOS: 3531

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.3 (3)                                Conduct: 4.3 (3)

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): 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 :

990517:  Mental Health Services Outpatient Consultation Report:
 Applicant referred for evaluation of vague suicidal ideation and possible depression.
         Diagnoses:
 AXIS I: Occupational problem.
                   AXIS II: Personality disorder not otherwise specified schizoid and avoidant features.
                   AXIS III: None
                  AXIS IV: Increased occupational stress.
                  AXIS V: Current goal assessment of functioning is 60. Highest global assessment of functioning in the past year is 70.
         Recommendation: Applicant is psychiatrically unfit for continued military service and expeditious administrative separation is recommended based on a diagnosis of personality disorder.

990524:  Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune, NC: “The [Applicant] has been evaluated by Mental Health and diagnosed with a severe personality disorder. The [Applicant] is not mentally ill and is responsible for his behavior. However, this [Applicant] does manifest a long-standing disorder of character and behavior, which is of such severity as to interfere with his ability to function effectively in the military environment. Although not imminently suicidal or homicidal, the [Applicant] may pose a continuing risk to do harm to self or other and negatively impact unit effectiveness and morale if retained in naval service. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that the [Applicant] be processed expeditiously for an administrative discharge.”

 990629:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of personality disorder. The factual basis for this recommendation was the Mental Health Clinic, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune mental evaluation letter dated 24 May 1999.
990707:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

990806:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies (Personality Disorder).

990921:  Commanding Officer, Chemical Biological Incident Response Force recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of personality disorder.

990921:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

991012:  GCMCA, Commanding General, II Marine Expeditionary Force, directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government based on a personality disorder.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19991026 by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper (B), but the service characterization was inequitable (C).

The Applicant and his representative (Disabled American Veterans) contend that the service characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) is inequitable based on the Applicant’s quality of service. Whenever a Marine is separated for the convenience of the Government (in this case, Personality Disorder), service may be characterized as honorable, general (under honorable conditions), or uncharacterized. The Board found no negative counseling entries, nonjudicial punishments, or courts-martial convictions in the Applicant’s service records. What is more, the Applicant’s average proficiency and conduct marks were 4.3 and 4.3, respectively. This record reflects honest and faithful service, which is inconsistent with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The Board concluded, by unanimous vote, that an upgrade to Honorable is appropriate . Relief granted.

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 any other evidence related to his discharge 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. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

C. 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01146

    Original file (MD02-01146.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 the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the contentions as set forth by the Applicant, ill her request that she be given the opportunity to change her Personality Disorder (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge to an Medical (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge. The FSM states that this...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00765

    Original file (MD00-00765.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980722: 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. st Force Service Support Group] directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) for convenience of the government due to a personality disorder. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00714

    Original file (MD04-00714.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Spec 1: Disorderly conduct. On 20030212, the Applicant’s Battalion Commander recommended that the Applicant be “separated with a general (under honorable conditions), characterization of service, by convenience of the government due to a personality disorder”. In cases where no other reason for separation set forth in the Naval Military Personnel Manual is appropriate, but where separation of a member is considered to be in the best interest of the service, the Secretary of the Navy has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00561

    Original file (MD04-00561.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The boards decision to upgrade my discharge will help me in getting the opportunity to do just that.Regards,A_D_ (Applicant)” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 000906 - 001010 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 001011 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01447

    Original file (MD04-01447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-01447 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040913. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. [… Absent himself without proper authority...] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.960422: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00794

    Original file (MD02-00794.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00794 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Naval Discharge Review Board of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the contentions as set forth by the Applicant, in his...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00608

    Original file (MD01-00608.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00608 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010402, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. They told me that if it didn't help me, they would recommend that I be discharged, but after it was over, I felt NO different and they told my command that I was "psychiatrically fit" for full duty my hope was crushed. Please contact me with information about this query at one of the numbers listed below.A_ G. H_...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00095

    Original file (MD02-00095.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00095 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011016, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Honorable. My General Discharge is unjustified due to the fact it was based on a medical diagnosis instead of my service and performance records.2. Based on above issues and reference I am respectfully requesting my re-entry code be upgraded, to allow me to further serve...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600255

    Original file (MD0600255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    and pt. Naval Hospital, Okinawa, M. W_: S: Pt (Applicant) seen in follow up denying any further suicidal/homicidal ideation or depressive symptoms since last appointment. In the Applicant’s issue that the narrative reason for discharge should be depression instead of personality disorder, the Board found that the Applicant was diagnosed with " Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified with Passive/Aggressive Traits " by competent medical authority at the Psychiatric Clinic, U. S. Naval...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500883

    Original file (MD0500883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00883 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050421. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Job/Character Reference ltr from P_ A. J_, Mr Tux Leominster, dtd July 14, 2005 Job/Character Reference ltr from C_ I_, Regional Manager, Mr. Tux/Squire Tux, dtd July 12, 2005 (unsigned) Character reference ltr frm D_ S_, undtd Letter from City...