ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:
         Reentry Code change to: NONE REQUESTED

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USMCR (DEP)      20030730 - 20031102     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20031103    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050928     Highest Rank:
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 25 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 79
MOS: 6492
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): /         Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle LoA (2)

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP: SCM: SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling: 2

- 20050526: Personality Disorder.

- 20050706:      For following deficiencies: Personality Disorder. Processed for Admin Sept due to convenience of the government due to personality disorder.

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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation:           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        



Types of Witnesses Who Testified

         Expert:           Character:      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 6203.3 CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present.

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.       The Applicant contends his command did not properly treat his condition, but processed him for administrative separation.
2.       The Applicant contends his command acted improperly during the administrative separation process.
3.       The Applicant contends his service record warrants an Honorable discharge.

Decision


Date: 20150806           Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings mental health diagnosis of Personality disorder (PD), and processing for administrative separation for PD. The Applicant’s record shows no other negative aspects of performance or conduct while in service. Based on the Applicant’s diagnosis of PD, and recommendation by Clinical Psychologist, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, and submit a written statement. The Applicant was not entitled to request an administrative board.

As a result of the Applicant’s claim that a MENTAL HEALTH DIAGNOSIS impacted his discharge, and in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (e)(2), the Naval Discharge Review Board included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with special training on mental health disorder. The Applicant’s service record documents the Applicant was diagnosed with a mental health disorder while serving in the armed forces.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his command did not properly treat his condition, but processed him for administrative separation. The Applicant states that he did not have a long standing PD, and was misdiagnosed because he was having emotional problems related to his breakup with his girlfriend. However, the Applicant’s record shows that he was referred to the Mental Health Unit because he was using a razor to cut his wrists over a period of two to three weeks in April and May 2005, and reported experiencing periods of depression for about a year. The Applicant was evaluated by mental health authorities and determined to have a PD, not otherwise specified, with Borderline and Schizoid features. The treating Pschologist strongly recommended the Applicant be processed for administrative separation for unsuitability for service. Unless substantial and credible information exists to rebut the medical authority’s findings that occurred at or about the time of the Applicant’s separation from service, the NDRB does not have jurisdictional authority to override medical authority diagnoses or findings that result in administrative separation. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his command acted improperly during the administrative separation process. The Applicant states that his command violated the Marine Coorps Order for Separations and Retirement in discharging him without proper notification of deficiency, nor provide him with an opportunity to correct his deficiency, and did not prove that his condition significantly impaired his ability to perform in a military environment. The Applicant’s record shows he was first diagnosed with PD in May 2005 and his command counselled him for PD with a page 11 counselling statement. The Applicant was counselled again in July 2005 with a page 11 counselling statement that he was to be processed for administrative separation for reason of PD. From May until July the Applicant was treated by proper mental health provider and determined that his mental health condition rendered him unsuitable for further military service. The Applicant’s record reports that he had multiple lacerations from cutting himself horizontally across his left wrist that were in various stages of healing. The NDRB determined there was no impropriety with the discharge, and no other narrative reason for separation more clearly describes why the Applicant was discharged. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his service record warrants an Honorable discharge. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that his discharge is inequitable. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most servicemembers, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges. In fairness to those Marines and Sailors who served honorably, Commanders and Separation Authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving servicemembers receive no higher characterization than is due. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the narrative reason for discharge or the reenlistment code. Relief denied.

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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

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 Disable d American 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 their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 , or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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