Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902021

Original file (MD0902021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090709

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)       20000928 - 20010831     Active:          20030310 - 20070309
USMCR (DEP)      20021227 - 20030309

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 200703 10     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20080812      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 02 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 81
MOS: 3521
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / 2.0 ( )         Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle (3) (Iraq) (2) (2)
         (Iraq) CoC MM

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:
- 20080520 :      Article 83 (Fraudulent enlistment concealed the fact of a medical problem.)
         Article (False official statement by stating in a medical history report he had a medical problem when at reenlistment he did not make these disclosures)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM: SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:
- 20080226 :      For failure to obey an order or regulation and unauthorized absence on 20080220 .

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ MISCONDUCT ”
         “ 2007 03 10 ”
         “CONTINUOU S HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 030310 UNTIL 070309 ”

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 Representation:              From Congress member:
         Other Documentation:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), 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 .

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 fo r violation of the UCMJ, Ar ticle 83 (Fraudulent enlistment) and Article (False official statement ).

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends his recruiter told him to lie while filling out his reenlistment paperwork .

Decision

Date: 20 10 0713 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 eviden ce submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which 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 warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCM J): Article 83 (Fraudulent enlistment concealed the fact of a medical problem) and Article (False official statement by stating in a medical history report he had a medical problem when at reenlistment he did not make these disclosures). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised his rights to c onsult with a qualified counsel; but waived rights to s ubmit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority and to re quest an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his recruiter told him to lie while filling out his reenlistment paperwork. 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 other evidence, besides a statement from a recruiter instructor, to support the contention that he just followed orders by marking the form the way the recruiter told him, while completing the reenlistment process. On 26 July 2006, during his first enlistment, the Applicant was recommended for an administrative separation due to his medical problems with his knee. The NDRB opined that the Applicant, a former Sergeant of Marines, purposely falsified documents , the Report of Medical History, to conceal his medical issues in order to collect a re-enlistment bonus. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Also , even if the Applicant could show misrepresentations in the recruitment process, such misrepresentations would neither amount to a justification nor to a defense for the Applicant’s own misconduct. Relief denied.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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 help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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; attending or completing 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE. 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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additio nal Reviews 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 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), 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901829

Original file (MD0901829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...
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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000070

Original file (MD1000070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues The Applicant seeks appropriate relief by a change to his characterization of service to Honorable and a narrative reason for separation change to “Defective Enlistment” or ‘Fraudulent Entry into Military Service. Therefore, under equity, the Applicant should have been separated for erroneous enlistment or fraudulent enlistment and that his service was honorable; as such, the...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101588

Original file (MD1101588.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined relief based on this issue was not warranted. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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 establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...
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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901386

Original file (MD0901386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By regulation, members notified of intended recommendation for discharge within the first 180 days of enlistment are eligible for an uncharacterized or entry-level separation characterization of service. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than 6 months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable.The NDRB advises the Applicant that, with respect to non-service related administrative matters, i.e. Department of Veterans...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901366

Original file (MD0901366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20060610 - 20070604Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20070605Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20080915Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)11 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:41MOS: 9971Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):(3)/ (3)Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001495

Original file (MD1001495.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements:From Applicant:From Representation:From Congress member:Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000810

Original file (ND1000810.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks an upgrade in his discharge characterization and change in narrative reason for separation in order to reenlist in the United States Army. Rather, the NDRB examines the propriety and the equity of an Applicant’s discharge and is authorized to change the characterization of that service or the reason for discharge if factors of equity or...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901426

Original file (MD0901426.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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902021

Similar Decisions