Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800955
Original file (MD0800955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080408
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19931210 - 19940103              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19940104               Period of E nlistment : Years Months             Date of Discharge: 19940602
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 29 D a ys         Education Level:        Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 51
MOS: 0300        Highest Rank:                     Fitness R eports:
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions) : ( )/ ( )
 Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle ,

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP : S CM :       SPCM: CC:      

6105 Counseling :

19940413 : For your inability to participate in training which includes even minimal amounts of physical exertion.
Y ou may be suffering from a physical condition or injury beyond your control.

19940505 : For your substandard physical performance as evidence by your lack of strength and endurance that
interferes with the effective performance of duties. At this time, you are unable to participate in training
which includes even minimal amounts of physical exertion. You may be suffering from a physical
condition beyond your control.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or 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 Member of Congress:

Other Documentation (Describe)


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Change narrative reason for discharge to “Medical”.
2. Unfair d ischarge.

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 0402             Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall ERRONEOUS ENLISTMENT .
Discussion

 : 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 , specifically the paragraph concerning , regarding .
: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because his discharge was unfairly based on a shoulder injury which was improperly determined to have existed prior to enlisting into the Marine Corps. 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. The record of evidence shows the Applicant was diagnosed with chronic subluxation of his left shoulder; this diagnosis was evaluated and confirmed by the Orthopedics Department at Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital as evidenced by the hospital commanding officer’s letter dated 2 May 1994. The Applicant was subsequently discharged with an “Uncharacterized” discharge due to “Erroneous Enlistment . ”

For the edification of the Applicant, a discharge due to “Erroneous Enlistment” is appropriate when the enlistment would not have occurred had the material facts been known at the time of enlistmen t. The NDRB determined the record of evidence shows this determination was made by competent medical authorities and the Applicant did not submit any evidence to rebut the diagnosis; therefore the NDRB determined the discharge due to “Erroneous Enlistment” was proper. The Applicant should understand this narrative reason for discharge does not imply fraudulent conduct on the part of the Applicant. Additionally, a disch arge initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active duty service is directed to be “Uncharacterized” unless misconduct occurs which warrants a lesser characterization, or an “Honorable” discharge is approved by the Secretary of the Navy for unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of military duties. It is clear no such circumstance exists in the Applicant’s case and as such the NDRB determined the discharge characterization should remain “Uncharacterized.” Finally, wi th respect to non service-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, educational pursuits and especially civilian employment, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge.
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 the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.
Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 27 JUNE 1989 until 17 AUGUST 1995, 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 .


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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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 or is referred to a court-martial fo r 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 other medical related reasons. ” 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 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 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801850

    Original file (MD0801850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should understand neither the “Uncharacterized” characterization nor the “ Erroneous Enlistment ” narrative reason for separation convey any negative meaning. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and a change to the characterization of service or the narrative reason for separation would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800521

    Original file (MD0800521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20050505 - 20051010 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20051011Period of enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20051229Length of Service: 00 Yrs 02 Mths19 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:20AFQT: 41MOS: 9900Highest Rank: PVTFitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): NONEAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900624

    Original file (ND0900624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant’s case does not meet this high criterion for an upgrade to his characterization of service to “Honorable ” .After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700219

    Original file (ND0700219.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The processing and the uncharacterized characterization of service were proper.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.In the Applicant’s case the separation process was in compliance with the Naval Military Personnel ManualArticle 1910-130for separation by reason of defective enlistments and inductions -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800569

    Original file (ND0800569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19990602–19990603Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990603Period of enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19990901Length of Service: 00 Yrs 02Mths29 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 31Highest Rank/Rate:E-3Evaluation marks:Performance: NONE Behavior:NONEOTA: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle Pistol Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801034

    Original file (ND0801034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined an upgrade to General, as requested, would be inappropriate as the “ Uncharacterized ” better reflects the Applicant’s 22 days of service.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800422

    Original file (ND0800422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801621

    Original file (ND0801621.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700110

    Original file (ND0700110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the Applicant’s condition that resulted in the characterization of discharge. NOT FOUND IN RECORD Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING OFFICER, RECRUIT TRAINING COMMAND (20000331)Reason for discharge directed: -DUE TO...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900225

    Original file (ND0900225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant provided post-service medical documentation which was consistent with his pre-service medical evaluations, the Board finds it does not mitigate the diagnosis by the military cardiologist at the medical clinic in Great Lakes.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...