Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200077

Original file (MD1200077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20111020

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)       20050411 - 20050 827     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050828     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20051108      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 12 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 68
MOS: 9900
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 :

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:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

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 contends that she did not conceal her medical history from her recruiter but that he told her not to say anything during MEPS screening.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1004 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. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service began on 28 August 2005 and ended with her administrative separation on 08 November 2005 for Fraudulent Entry. Per regulations, a n Uncharacterized discharge is warranted when s eparation is initiated while a member is within the first 180 days of continuous active duty except when the characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) is authorized or Honorable is clearly warranted. The Applicant had no misconduct that would rate an UOTHC discharge, and there was no evidence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance that would merit an Honorable characterization.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that she did not conceal her medical history from her recruiter but that he told her not to say anything during MEPS screening. The Applicant was treated by a civilian physician for migraine headaches at age 17 and prescribed Imitrex . The Applicant did not divulge her history of migraines to MEPS doctors during her enlistment medical screening. The Applicant did divulge her medical history of d ysmenorrhea and did receive a medical waiver to enlist from Marine Corps Recruiting Command. She admitted to migraines at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island during receivin g and made a medical statement where she made an allegation against her recruiter for telling her to not tell anyone about her migraines. The allegation was not followed up with an investigation of the recruiter or the Recruiting Station. The Applicant’s medical waiver for dysmenorrhea lends credence to her claim that she was truthful about her medical history to her recruiter . Also, the omission by Recruiting Command in not investigating her allegation of recruiter misconduct leaves some doubt as to the integrity of the chain of command. The NDRB determined that there was enough doubt in the presumption of regularity on the part of the Government that the Applicant should have her narrative reason for discharge changed to Secretarial Authority. Relief granted.

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 but the narrative reason for separation shall change to . 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.

Record of Vote

Board Members	Characterization	Narrative Reason
		Change to

Presiding Officer
		Change to


		Change to


		Change to


		Change to

Recorder

Recorder’s Signature: _____________________________________________

Presiding Officer’s Signature: _______________________________________

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 | 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 | 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 | ND0901980

Original file (ND0901980.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Decision Date: 20100810Location: Washington D.C.Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY.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. With respect to non-service-related administrative matters (i.e., Department of Veterans Affairs benefits or...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2005-143

Original file (2005-143.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

On February 28, 1996, the applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard pursuant to Article 12.B.18.2 of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual. CGPC stated that the applicant’s discharge for physical standards as determined by the DRB is consistent with Coast Guard policy and that RE-4 is the appropriate reenlistment code given the applicant’s character of service. In light of the fact that the applicant’s record is devoid of anything derogatory and that the DRB changed the narrative reason for...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02212

Original file (BC-2003-02212.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02212 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized entry-level separation be changed to honorable and the narrative reason changed from “Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800002

Original file (ND0800002.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19961115 - 19970909 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19970910Period of enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge:19980521Length of Service: Yrs Mths12DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:18AFQT: unreadableHighest Rank/Rate:RMSREvaluation marks:Performance: NA Behavior:NA OTA: NA Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Types of Documents...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200630

Original file (ND1200630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900819

Original file (ND0900819.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Seeks reenlistment opportunities 2. ” 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 have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101648

Original file (ND1101648.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200077

Similar Decisions