Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400011

Original file (MD1400011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20130926

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)       20120611 - 20130714     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20130715     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20130725      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 11 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 71
MOS: 8011
Proficiency/Conduct M arks : N/A / N/A      Fitness R eports:
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA / CONF :

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

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps , MMSB-13, 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:          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 A pplicant contends he informed his recruiter of his anxiety attack that occurred while in the D elayed Entry Program.

Decision

Date: 20140515 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 included no 6105 counseling warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. B ased on the Applicant ’s failure to disclose his history of anxiety attacks , command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he informed his recruiter of his anxiety attack that occurred while in the D elayed Entry Program. 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 evidence, to support the contention that the recruiter acted improperly . The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. However, 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. The record shows when the Applicant was notified of administrative separation processing for his fraudulent entry, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. If the Applicant felt he was mistakenly charged with his fraudulent entry , it was his obligation to contest th at charge at the time it was made. Further, the Applicant states in his DD Form 293 that he had only experienced one previous panic attack prior to shipping out for basic training , which he c ontends occurred in January 2013. However, his medical record dated 17 July 2013 describes that the Applicant reported “having problems with fairly severe panic symptoms for about the last [two to three] years of his life…and that he had to be taken to the [emergency room] for severe panic symptoms… he was give n medication while there…the panic attacks happened on-and-off for the next few years…when the [ M oment of T ruth] time came he raised his hand and admitted to them as well as a history of being treated for sexual abuse .” The NDRB determined Applicant’s contention is inconsistent with his records , and the records show the Applicant clearly failed to disclose his history of panic attacks, emergency room visit, and his counseling from ages 6 to 16 . 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

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901108

Original file (ND0901108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. The Applicant has requested a change in her narrative reason to Entry level separation and contends she did not fraudulently enlist in the military and that she has never been diagnosed, treated, or referred for any mental illness. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...
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...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500748

Original file (ND0500748.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Applicant contends that he did not fraudulently enter the military service because he did not have a diagnosed disqualifying anxiety disorder prior to the Navy.
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801167

Original file (MD0801167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee a change to his discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401047

Original file (MD1401047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20110706 - 20120624Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20120625Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20120717Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)23 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:55MOS: NONEProficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NOB/NOBFitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101191

Original file (MD1101191.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. : (Decisional)() .The...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900076

Original file (MD0900076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the factors enumerated above, the NDRB determined the Applicant was never diagnosed with service related PTSD by military medical personnel who had complete access to his complete medical record and accurate service history; his anxiety existed prior to entering the service and he was never found to be not responsible for his actions. Therefore, the Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301661

Original file (MD1301661.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant wants a medical discharge. ” 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.
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200469

Original file (MD1200469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Accordingly, relief as requested is denied.Issue 3: (Decisional Issue) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.The Applicant contends that his misconduct of record was the result of stress from depression and anxiety related to his combat service.The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900349

Original file (ND0900349.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends he was diagnosed as clinically depressed while at boot camp due to past traumatic events, combined with being away from his wife and two young children for the first time.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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400011

Similar Decisions