Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201639
Original file (MD1201639.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120801
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)       20031118 - 20040815     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040816     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20040921      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 06 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 52
MOS: 9900
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): NA / NA      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 seeks an upgrade to qualify for employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant contends h is discharge was the result of f abricated information obtained while under duress. He also contends the medical reason for discharge did not exist prior to basic training.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0509            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 sta ndards of equity and propriety. Based on the diagnosed medical condition by competent medical authorities and the Applicant’s own admission, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for 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 h is discharge was the result of f abricated information obtained while under duress. He also contends the medical reason for discharge did not exist prior to basic training. During separation proceedings, the Applicant waived his right to consult with counsel and submit a rebuttal to the separation. If the Applicant believed there were mitigating circumstances, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made. The Applicant’s record also reflects the following personal comment made on his voluntary medical statement form dated 13 S eptember 2004, “I did not tell MEP S doctor s about my asthma. Prior to coming to boot camp , I had shortness of breath.” The Applicant did supply post-service test results from a physician stating that he did not currently suffer from asthma and was in good health . However, the NDRB relied upon the Applicant’s statements made while in service, and with no evidence that they were made under duress, to determine he fraudulently enlisted in the Marine Corps.

An 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. 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 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401462

    Original file (MD1401462.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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500689

    Original file (MD1500689.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNCHARACTERIZED and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901872

    Original file (ND0901872.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraph Post-Service Conduct , for additional information.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand 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 years from the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901738

    Original file (MD0901738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:Entry Level Separation Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20040623 - 20050612Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20050613Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20051130Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)18 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:UNREADABLEMOS: 9971 Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):N/A/N/AAwards and Decorations...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900249

    Original file (ND0900249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, the Board has determined the Applicant’s separation by reason of homosexual conduct was equitable and proper. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Should the Applicant feel his post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900528

    Original file (ND0900528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was made the subject of a SPCM but did not receive a punitive discharge.In regards to the Applicant’s contention he was not given the right to a review board, the record of evidence, which contains an administrative separation notice dated 28 June 2004, indicates the Applicant was notified of his administrative rights including the right to an AdministrativeSeparation Board. The NDRB determined an upgrade based on this issue would be inappropriate.Issue 2: (Equity) RELIEF NOT...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501127

    Original file (MD1501127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority determines whether the allegations in the notification of the basis for separation are substantiated by the evidence. 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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301041

    Original file (ND1301041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was based on errors of fact and law.2. As the Applicant’s service record contains no other evidence of negative aspects of performance or conduct, and as the narrative reason for separation has been proved by a preponderance of evidence to be in error, the NDRB determined the Applicant should be granted full relief with an Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001505

    Original file (ND1001505.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901391

    Original file (ND0901391.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...