Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801850
Original file (MD0801850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080915
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: ERRONEOUS ENTRY
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     20070307 - 20070730     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20070731     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20071130      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 00 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 43
MOS: 8000
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): /   Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA / CONF : NJP: SCM: SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20071129 :       For defective enlistment - erroneous enlistment for: medical condition.

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. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F, effective 1 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Applicant believes he passed his MEPS audio test and entered boot camp, therefore he should receive an “Honorable” discharge.

Decision


 Date: 20 0 9 0107            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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

 : ( ) . The Applicant appears to contend his characterization of service “Uncharacterized” is inequitable because he passed audio tests in MEPS and was allowed to enter boot camp. He was subsequently found to have hearing loss in e xcess of enlistment standards and given an “Uncharacterized” discharge for an erroneous enlistment. 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 Applicant should understand neither the “Uncharacterized” characterization nor the “ E rroneous E nlistment ” narrative reason for separation convey any negative meaning .

W ith respect to non - service-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, educational pursuits, and especially civilian employment, an “U ncharacterized ” separation is considered the equivalent of an “H onorable ” or “G eneral ( U nder H onorable C onditions) ” discharge. The Applicant should be aware in cases where a discharge is initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active duty an “Uncharacterized” discharge is directed 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 on either account. As a result , the appropriate discharge characterization would be “Uncharacterized”.

An “ E rroneous E nlistment” is given when an enlistment mistakenly occurs , due to no fraudulent conduct on the part of the Marine. An “Erroneous Enlistment” is authorized and valid if the enlistment would not have occurred had the relevant facts been known by the Marine Corps. In the Applicant’s case, had his hearing loss been detected initially, his enlistment never would have occurred. The “Erroneous Enlistment” in no way indicates the Applicant did something of a fraudulent nature.
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 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 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902410

    Original file (ND0902410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, with respect to non-service related administrative matters, i.e. Department of Veterans Affairs benefits, civilian employment, etc., an Uncharacterized separation shall be considered the equivalent of an Honorable or General characterization.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and administrative separationprocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the...

  • 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0902208

    Original file (ND0902208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001956

    Original file (MD1001956.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    With respect to non-service related administrative matters,i.e., Department of Veteran Affairs benefits, civilian employment, etc.,an Uncharacterized separation shall be considered as the equivalent of anHonorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization.The NDRB found the Applicant’s characterization of service and narrative reason for separation to be appropriate as assigned.According to regulations, an Erroneous Enlistment occurs if the relevant facts had been known by the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601064

    Original file (ND0601064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Reason for Discharge shall -ERRONEOUS ENLISTMENT.Summary of Service:Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19990414-19990509Active: NONE Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990510Years Contracted:; Date of Discharge: 19990602 Length of Service: 00Yrs 00 Mos 23 Days (does not exclude lost time, if any)Time Lost During This Period: Education Level: Age at this Enlistment: AFQT: 54Highest Rate/Rank:FRPerformance Evaluation Averages:NOT APPLICABLEAwards and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500697

    Original file (ND1500697.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included an Uncharacterized entry level administrative discharge from the Navy for reason of Fraudulent Entry into Military Service. 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 SEPERATION). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900899

    Original file (ND0900899.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ), an uncharacterized separation shall be considered the equivalent of an Honorable or General (under honorable conditions) characterization.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000360

    Original file (ND1000360.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501272

    Original file (MD0501272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. He stated in his report “I have seen several recruits who remained with hearing levels worse than this.” The report further states that my hearing is essentially normal. nd RTBN, MCRD Parris Island, SC, recommended Applicant’s discharge by reason of erroneous entry.040802: SF513/DD2161 [Consultation Sheet]: “Reason for request: ENT eval requested on 18 y/o male who is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900043

    Original file (ND0900043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Receiving an erroneous entry narrative reason does not place or indicate any blame on the Applicant’s behalf.The Applicant’s statement she was healthy when she enlisted into the Navy as evidenced by a pap smear done in May 2005, a year earlier, is contradicted by the medical records which indicate she had an abnormal pap smear 8 May 2006 (within 7 days of commencing active duty). Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information...