Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100723
Original file (MD1100723.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110125
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)       20090601 - 20091213     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20091214     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20100120      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 07 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 82
MOS: 8011
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): N/A / N/A    Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:     SCM:     SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling:

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:        

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.       The Applicant wants the characterization of his service and the Narrative Reason for Separation changed so he can re-enlist in the military.
 2.       The Applicant wants the characterization of his service changed to enhance employment opportunities.
3.       The Applicant contends he was discharged for a condition that no longer existed and had experienced no effects of the injury since being treated when he was in high school. He adds that he was only questioned about whether he experienced any pain or discomfort from the injury, to which he repl ied “ no , ” and that the Marine Corps did not re-evaluate his condition with new x-rays or M RIs .
4.       The Applicant contends he informed his recruiter of his complete medical history, including an injury sustained during a high school weightlifting incident, who in tu rn told him not to mention it.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0 313            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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 g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service did not include any 6105 counseling warnings, non-judicial punishments, or trials by court-martial for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. A qualified medical officer diagnosed the Applicant with a herniated intervertebral disc and determined that it existed prior to entering the service. Based on this diagnosis and the Applicant’s failure to reveal his condition during the application process , his command administratively processed him for separation due to his fraudulent entry into the military. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant wants the characterization of his service and the Narrative Reason for Separation changed so he can re-enlist in the military. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge or change a narrative reason for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable narrative reason for separation, or Reentry (RE) code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Additionally, the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces and is not authorized to change an RE code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to RE codes.

: (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants the characterization of his service changed to enhance employment opportunities. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was discharged for a condition that no longer existed and ha d experienced no effects of the injury since being treated when he was in high school. He adds that he was only questioned about whether he experienced any pain or discomfort from the injury, to which he replied “ no , ” and that the Marine Corps did not re-evaluate his condition with new x-rays or MRIs . 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 c redible evidence to support his claim that the condition no longer existed, that he was not affected by it, or that the steps taken by military medical personnel were insufficient. Neither the documentation provided by the Applicant nor his statement was enough to overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Therefore, without sufficient and credible evidence, the NDRB determined that relief based on this issue is not warranted. Relief denied.

 Issue 4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he informed his recruiter of his complete medical history, including an injury sustained during a high school wei ghtlifting incident, who in turn told him not to mention it. 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 claim. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support his claim that his recruiter told him to withhold information about his medical history. The Applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. The Applicant had an obligation to truthfully answer all questions on the medical history questionnaire regarding his medical history regardless of what his recruiter might have instructed him to do. Because he failed to do so, t he Board determined the assigned Narrative Reason for Separation and characterization of service are appropriate. 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 FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE. 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 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

  • 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500597

    Original file (MD1500597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant stated that he experienced PTSD symptoms related to his combat service in Iraq. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901720

    Original file (ND0901720.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants his reentry (RE) code and separation code changed.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002100

    Original file (MD1002100.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:INJURY Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20070718 - 20071104Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20071105Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20080208Highest Rank:Length of Service: Years Months04 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:72MOS: 8000Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NONE / NONEFitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201611

    Original file (ND1201611.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests a change in his narrative reason for separation to Erroneous Entry and separation code change to JFC, because he contends he was physically, emotionally, and psychologically unprepared for service in 2008. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100683

    Original file (MD1100683.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 | MD0900431

    Original file (MD0900431.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.Discussion :().The Applicant contends she was given an unfair discharged, from injuries she had received during her training while atboot camp. The Board determined an upgrade is warranted: The characterization will be changed to “Honorable” and the narrative reason to “ Secretarial Authority”. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400856

    Original file (MD1400856.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902369

    Original file (ND0902369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Partial relief is warranted on equitable grounds.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 . Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000549

    Original file (MD1000549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB thoroughly examined the Applicant’s record of service and found no documented evidence of misconduct, counseling warnings, or medical evaluations that would support his claim that he suffered from the effects of PTSD after his return from Iraq. Though no significant medical or mental health issues were evident at the time of his separation, and even if combat or other service-related medical issues did exist, DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation,...