Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600780
Original file (MD0600780.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD06-00780

Applicant ’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060517 . 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.
Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070315 . 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) by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues
         No decisional issues.

Documentation
In addition to the service and medical record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant ’s DD Form 214 (State Director of Veterans Affairs - 6)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19990330 - 19991107       COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19991108              Date of Discharge: 20011115

Length of Service (years, months, days):

 Active: 0 2 00 0 8
         Inactive: None

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

Age at Entry: 18
Years Contracted: 5

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 85

Highest Rank: PFC                                    MOS: 7251 (Air Traffic Controller Trainer)

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.1 ( 5 )                                 Conduct: 4 . 1 ( 5 )
Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Rifle Qualifications Badge (Marksman) .


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 :

001018:  Mental Health Outpatient Consultation by M. M_, PhD, Clinical Psychologist: Applicant referred by flight surgeon to determine whether the service member’s anxiety would preclude him from working as an air traffic controller.
          Diagnoses:       AXIS I: None
                           AXIS II: Schizoid personality traits versus disorder
         Applicant fit for full duty given the caveat that he does require supervision in the tower.
001211:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Being UA on 2, 20, and 30 Oct.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

 010209:  All ATC ratings suspended.

010423:  Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Inability to handle your financial affairs by writing checks with insufficient funds in your checking account.), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

 010604:  Report of Medical History, Physicians summary: Suicidal attempt in Nov 2000. Evaluated by psych which recommends admin separation based on personality disorder.

 011 0 31 :  GCMCA, Commander, Marine Corps Air Bases, Eastern Area , directed the Applicant 's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder.

Service Record Book contains a partial Adm inistrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20011115 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 and equitable (B and C). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).
The Applicant contends his discharge should be honorable. Under applicable regulations, separations based on a personality disorder should be honorable or general (under honorable conditions) as determined by the Applicant’s service record. A general discharge may be warranted if the Applicant’s service contains records of nonjudicial punishments, disciplinary actions, or if other significant negative aspects existed, which outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s period of service. Additionally, a general discharge may be warranted if the Applicant’s performance evaluation averages are not sufficient to merit an honorable discharge. The Applicant’s record contains two retention warning counseling entry for three occasions of unauthorized absences and writing bad checks . In light of this evidence, the B oard unanimously concluded that the Applicant’s discharge characterization of general (under honorable conditions) was proper and equitable. Relief denied.
The Applicant is advised that the Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits or enhancing employment and educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. Since these issues do not provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief, relief on this basis is not warranted.

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 documentation to support post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to the 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 P1900.16F), effective 02 Sep 01 until Present.

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 .

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00564

    Original file (MD04-00564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:14 pages from Applicant’s medical record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: Inactive: USMCR(J) 980724 - 981025 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 981026 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500944

    Original file (ND0500944.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character for discharge shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the reason for discharge shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-164, Separation Code “JFF.” PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“I am requesting the status of my discharge be upgraded to Honorable and Personality Disorder be removed from Narrative Reason for Separation. In...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00249

    Original file (ND02-00249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thank you Documentation Applicant did not provide any additional documentation for the Board to consider, therefore, only the Applicant's service and medical records were reviewed. Corrective action provided.Note: No record of counseling/retention warning in official record documenting how personality disorder has effected performance, nor did a period of time elapse for the Applicant to correct any deficiencies as specifically related to his personality disorder.920730: Applicant notified...

  • 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01297

    Original file (ND02-01297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :940512: Commenced 36 months active duty.960722: Pearl Harbor Mental Health Clinic: This is the first mental health evaluation for this 20 year old, single, black female, E-3/AD/USN with 2 years 2 months continuous active duty service, assigned to PSD, NAS, Barbers Point, HI, who was referred by her command’s medical department for evaluation of psychological problems. ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD PART III –...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01158

    Original file (ND02-01158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 990723 with a general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00427

    Original file (MD03-00427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. My discharge lowered from a recommended honorable discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions because of periods of unauthorized absences during my time of service. The Applicant received two non-judicial punishments and had two other cases of unauthorized absence, but was not charged because he checked himself into the Naval Hospital Mental Health Unit.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00648

    Original file (MD02-00648.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SNM was then released several days later when found SNM was infact no danger to himself or others, still it was recommended by the Naval doctors of SNM command that SNM be administratively separated from the Marine Corps. The factual basis for this recommendation was psychiatrist's recommendation for administrative separation due to a personality disorder. The Board reviewed the Applicant's service and medical records to determine the propriety and equity of the separation process.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00515

    Original file (ND03-00515.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00515 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030211. (f) (1).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 5420.174C. 950623: Medical Request to Mental Health: 21 year old active duty female...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00845

    Original file (MD02-00845.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00845 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020522, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :010516: Medical evaluation: Recommend administrative separation at the convenience of the government for failure to adapt. The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should have been the “type warranted by service record.” A review...