Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700850
Original file (MD0700850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-, USMC
MD07-00850
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070608   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE         Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6204.3

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:      1. VA Benefits
                           2. Recruiter told the Applicant not to worry about pre-enlistment incurred injuries

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE

Date: 20 071220                   Location: Washington D.C.         Representation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2: ( ). The Applicant implies that his recruiter told him not to reveal his a pre-existing knee problem at the time of his enlistment. 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 recruiter instructed the Applicant not to disclose a medical condition. The Applicant’s record reveals that the A pplicant voluntarily made a statement acknowledging he withheld information from MEPs and that he knew what he was doing when he did so. The Applicant ’s most recent statement alone do es not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge 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. The Applicant’s service was marred by one discharge warnings and one NJP for Article83 (Fraudulent Enlistment). V iolation of Article 83 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate .
In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries , Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found that


Summary of Service

 Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    20040729 - 20041227              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20041228     Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20051003
Length of Service: 00 Yrs 09 Mths 03 D ys         Lost Time: Days UA: Days Confined:
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 39          MOS: 0311 Highest Rank:
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      3.7 ( 2 )/ 3.7 ( 2 )    Fitness reports:
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle , National Defense Service Medal

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 20050902:        Medical Record: Reason for visit: Knee pain
         Diagnosis: Patellofemoral; Syndrome
         Recommendation: This Marine is safe to train. If he is not able or willing to RTFD, then he should be considered for administrative separation for a medical condition not considered a disability.

20050915:        Applicant’s Voluntary Statement: I sprained my knee, broke it and dislocated it twice and have a torn ACL. I never mentioned this to MEPS. I knew what I was getting myself into and I did it for a reason.

20050921:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 83 – Fraudulent Enlistment.
         Awarded - FOP ($339.00) for (1 months); Restr for (14 days).

20050921:        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for Fraudulent Enlistment.
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:   20050922
Basis for Discharge:     DUE TO:
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                 20050922
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      


Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20050922 )
SJA review (date):      
Separation Authority (date):     SCHOOL OF INFANTRY ( 20051003 )
Basis for discharge directed:   DUE TO:
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20051003







Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:     Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, MCO P1900.16F), effective
01 September 2001 until Present, paragraph 6204, DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENT AND INDUCTION.
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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 83.


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : 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 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 : 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. 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. 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 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 and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.

Board Membership: 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0902467

    Original file (MD0902467.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Decisional issues: Applicant seeks change in narrative reason for discharge and characterization of separation due to both propriety (wrong narrative reason for his circumstances) and (equity) in that he rates an Honorable characterization due to serving without misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000451

    Original file (ND1000451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s separation did not warrant the right to elect an administrative hearing board.The Applicant was recommended for administrative separation pursuant to Article 1910-134 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN), Separation by Reason of Defective Enlistment and Induction - Fraudulent Entry Into the Naval Service. The Applicant was seen by a medical officer and evaluated for enlistment; the Medical Officer’s report, and the Applicant’s provided medical background...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700173

    Original file (ND0700173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issue 2 (): The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600995

    Original file (MD0600995.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: NOTIFICATION PROCEDUREDate Notified:20050912Basis: Least Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Record Supports Narrative Reason: YESDate Applicant Responded to Notification: 20050923Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) Board Date: NOT APPLICABLERecommendation of Commanding Officer (date): (20050912)SJA review (date):Discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201516

    Original file (ND1201516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants to change his RE-code.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500190

    Original file (ND1500190.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain FRAUDULENT ENTRY. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700475

    Original file (MD0700475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Failure to correct deficiencies may result or further violations of the UCMJ may result in judicial proceedings or administrative separation. 20060120 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) (20050120) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): SJA review (date): Separation Authority (date): CG 3 rd MAW (20050328) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO: Characterization directed: Date Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601112

    Original file (ND0601112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: NOT FOUND IN RECORDDate Notified:Reason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Administrative Board Date: NOT FOUND IN RECORDCommanding Officer Recommendation (date): NOT FOUND IN RECORDDischarge directed by (date):NOT FOUND IN RECORD Reason...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600220

    Original file (MD0600220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The subject named Marine’s (Applicant) evaluation and treatment plan had been reviewed by by Lt L_, Senior Medical Officer, Camp Geiger Branch Medical Clinic.Private G_ (Applicant) is a 20-year-old male with Lumbar Back Strain and Thoracic Back Strain.Private G_ (Applicant) is recommended for administrative separation for Lumbar Back Strain and Thoracic Back Strain which existed prior to entry (EPTE) and was not revealed on the military entrance physical examination at MEPS. The factual...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600996

    Original file (MD0600996.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Multiaxial Diagnoses: Axis I: Anxiety Disorder NOS, Occupational Problem Axis II: Avoidant traits Axis III: No diagnosis. Recommendation: Expeditious administrative separation is very strongly recommended for this service member. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and...