Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901209
Original file (MD0901209.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090406
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN [condition not a disability]

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20051205 - 20060116     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060117     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060818      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 02 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 52
MOS: 9900
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20060519 :       For your diagnosed physical condition not being a disability (PFS, MMT 30 days LD) and any resultant or aggravated condition which interferes with the effective performance of your duties.

- 20060725 :       For your diagnosed personality disorder NOS (EPTE).
Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ MARCORSEPMAN 6203.2 ”
         “ JFV1 ”
         “ CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.
Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:
                  DD 214:            Service / Medical Record:            Other Records:   

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:               Finances:                 Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                  Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:     
         Additional Statements :
                   From Applicant:            From Representat ion :               From Congress member :    

         Other Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 and Present, paragraph 6203, CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT .

 B. 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 V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Nondecisional issue . Would like a better job.
2. Decisional issue . Narrative reason for discharge should have been medical for knee injury vice personality disorder.
3. Decisional issue. Seeks p ost service conduct consideration .

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 1119        Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall CONDITION NOT A DISABILITY .
Discussion

 The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings . Based on his personality disorder and anxiety which left him unable to adjust to military life, his command administratively processed for separation. When notified for a dministrative s eparation p rocessing, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, and submit a written statement. He was not eligible for an a dministrative b oard.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is seeking employment with law enforcement and desires an upgrade so he can carry a weapon. Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

 Is sue 2: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant claims that he only accepted a personality disorder discharge because the Marine Corps refused to grant him a medical discharge based on knee problems he was experiencing. He states he was forced to rate himself as BELOW AVERAGE in a SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE review in order to be expeditiously discharged . During May, June and July 2006 , the Applicant was evaluated by mental health professionals at Camp Geiger , Camp Lejeune, NC . He was diagnosed with depression, anxiety disorder, and failure to adapt. He was suffering from feelings of helplessness, isolation, decreased sleep, crying spells and excessive worry about his wife and his family. During sessions with his doctor, h e remained focused on his dislike for military service . The Applicant displayed an anxious mood relating to carrying and firing weapons . He claimed t o be a c onscientious o bjector and felt God was telling him the military was a mistake.

Review of the Applicant’s medical records reveal that he came into the military with a waiver for knee surgery. The Applicant was seen for recurring knee pain as early as January 2006. At that time he was ordered to physical therapy, told to rest the knees and was given pain reducing medications. In a medical report dated 12 June 2006, the Applicant r equest ed an administrative separation due to a preexisting condition in volving his knees. On 13 June 2006 , the attending physician recommend ed an MRI to see if there was a possible miniscal injury in the knees. However, the physician stated that the Applicant lack ed motivation to stay in the Marine Corps and wanted to be administratively separated for a pre-existing condition.

On July 5, 2006 the Applicant’s commanding officer recommend ed that he be administratively separated because he could not adapt to a military lifestyle and the psychotherapy provided did not improved his condition. On July 12, 2006 the Applicant sign ed a voluntary statement in which he , ” under his own free will without any threats or promises , ” acknowledged that he wa s being medi c ally separated from the Marine Corps for an anxiety disorder. On 7 August, the Applicant receive d formal notification from the b attalion c ommanding o fficer that he was to receive a General (Under H onorable C onditions) discharge due to an a nxiety d isorder. Contrary to the Applicant ’ s claims, his s quad l eader, Sgt F _ , who observed him daily while in the Medical Separation Platoon, completed the Summary of Past Performance review dated August 7, 2006 . Sgt F _ noted
that the Applicant’s performance wa s below a verage in 8 key areas , a nd that he will be a liability if allowed to remain in the Marine Corps . Sgt F _ recommend ed his separation. Although the Applicant did have knee problems that were being addressed, he did not remain in uniform duty long enough to exhaust efforts to heal or correct his knee problems. The Applicant was administratively separated due to Personality Disorder , based on the previously noted diagnosis, because he failed to adjust to a military environment and would not train.

Issue 3: Post Service (Equity). RELIEF NOT WARRANTED . The Applicant is trying to pursue a career in law enforcement and needs this upgrade to be authorized to carry weapons . Besides the Applicant's statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any additional documentation and evidence on his behalf to support a post-service conduct review. The Applicant's statements alone, without sufficient documentary evidence, are not enough to form a basis of relief. On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiate s or relate s di rectly to your issues in Item 6 " (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). Additionally, upon receipt of the Applicant's DD Form 293, the NDRB mails an acceptance letter that includes the Information Concerning Review Procedures , which discusses the submission of additional documents in paragraph 3, Submission of Evidence, and in the last section on page 4, Information Pertaining to a Review Based Upon Post-Service Conduct . The Applicant should have provide d documentation which could include but not limited to: letters of personal references and verifiable employment record /letter of recommendation from his employers; evidence that his depression and anxiety are under control; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities , evidence of financial stability (home ownership/home rental history, credit card payments); documentation of community /church service and if married, a marriage certificate. The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case - by - case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .
The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge , August 18,2006 . The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .]




ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 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.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

 Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100941

    Original file (MD1100941.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Applicant’s record of service and medical records document that appropriately credentialed mental health care providers diagnosed the Applicant with a severe Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (with Cluster B and Immature Features) and that he was recommended for an expeditious separation due to continued risk of harm to himself and to others.The Applicant’s service record and medical record document the identification, diagnosis, treatment, and eventual...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000869

    Original file (ND1000869.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Typically, service members separated for personality disorder, especially without any record of misconduct, are issued an RE code that would render them eligible for reenlistment except for a disqualifying factor. The Applicant’s contention that the personality disorder no longer exists, or has been overcome, does not provide a legitimate basis to revise official records that were accurate at the time of issuance.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801156

    Original file (MD0801156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: or UNCHARACTERIZEDNarrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19991208 - 19991228Active:19991229 - 20031003 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20031004Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20061123Length of Service: Years Month20 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT:38MOS: 0431Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):()/()Awards and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901135

    Original file (MD0901135.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20000714 - 20010624Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010625Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20060124Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)00 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:59MOS: 0621Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901746

    Original file (MD0901746.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800801

    Original file (MD0800801.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He also admits seeing more than one psychiatrist concerning this condition and was diagnosed with depression, anxiety, and attention deficit disorder. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601161

    Original file (MD0601161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Complete Service Record: YES Complete Medical Record: YESComplete Discharge Package: YESRegarding propriety, the Board found the discharge: PROPER Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge: EQUITABLEIssues 1-2: The Board determined that these Issues are not issues which can form the basis for relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. NONE Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100262

    Original file (ND1100262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Narrative Reason for Separation will not change since a Personality Disorder was diagnosed by a credentialed medical care provider.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand the administrative separation process, the Board found the discharge was proper but not equitable at the time of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001650

    Original file (MD1001650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 Jan 2008, the Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital Camp Lejeune sent a memo to the Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommending expeditious administrative separation of the Applicant for Condition Not a Disability due to a diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. On 25 Feb 2008, the Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Combat Service Support Schools endorsed the Applicant’s administrative separation package directing he receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001065

    Original file (MD1001065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB concluded that there was an inequity in the Applicant’s discharge action, was convinced that it was prejudicial to the Applicant, and therefore determined an inequity in the characterization of his service had occurred.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Records, Discharge Process, and the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined that the discharge was proper, but not equitable, and...