Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401306

Original file (MD1401306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMCR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20140708

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to: MEDICAL INJURY, HEAD TRAUMA SUSTAINED IN TRAINING

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         NONE      Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20130412     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20131202      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service:
         Inactive:        Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 23 D a y ( s )
         Active: Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 75
MOS: NONE
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 :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ ”

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:                  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 in order to receive service benefits.
2.       The Applicant contends that his DD Form 214, Narrative Reason for Separation, is inaccurate claiming that his minor injury incurred pre-service was healed and that he sustained an injury in-service; therefore, should read “Medical Injury, Head Trauma Sustained in Training”.
3. The Applicant contends that his characterization should be changed to Honorable for reasons that he was treated unfairly by his command.

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 1021          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 included no 6105 counseling warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. However, b ased on the Applicant ’s fraudulent entry , command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to receive 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his DD Form 214, Narrative Reason for Separation, is inaccurate claiming that his minor injury incurred pre-service was healed and that he sustained an injury in-service; therefore, should read “Medical Injury, Head Trauma Sustained in Training”. Per regulations, the initiation and submission of medical boards are at the discretion of the individual physician. There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. Further, the evidence of record does not indicate that proper authority erred by not initiating a medical board for the Applicant. Therefore, the NDRB found the Applicant’s issue to be without merit. Furthermore, 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change. T he NDRB found that the documentation and statements provided for review do not refute the presumption that the Applicant deliberately misrepresented his medical condition during the enlistment process, including the omission or concealment of facts which, if known at the time would have reasonably been expected to preclude, postpone, or otherwise affect the Marine’s eligibility for enlistment or induction. In addition, the documentation available for review did not refute the presumption that his condition still existed during the time of his enlistment. No other narrative reason other than fraudulent entry more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his characterization should be changed to Honorable for reasons that he was treated unfairly by his command. The NDRB was unable to review the Applicant’s complete discharge package, as it was not included in his official service record. The NDRB presumed regularity in governmental affairs in that the Separation Authority and Staff Judge Advocate review of the discharge package ensured that the Applicant was afforded all of his administrative rights pursuant to the separation process. 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 the command treated him unfairly. The documentation submitted by the Applicant was incomplete to rebut any presumption of regularity in governmental affairs by the NDRB. The separation code on the Applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates that a discharge hearing board was not warranted due to characterization of service. The Applicant fraudulently entered the service as determined by competent medical authority for failure to disclose a pre-service condition . The Applicant’s false official statement could have been tr ied by court-martial or his administr ative discharge could have been characterized with a less than honorable discharg e. However, t he command opted for the more lenient administrative discharge with an “Uncharacterized” characterization. In addition to the fraudulent entry, 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 remain UNCHARACTERIZED 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500268

Original file (ND1500268.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.
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101750

Original file (MD1101750.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20100220 - 20100425Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20100426Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20100603Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)09 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:53MOS: 8011Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NA/NAFitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400773

Original file (ND1400773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

As a result, his case did not warrant an expedited review in accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553(d)(1), but the NDRB did include a Navy psychiatrist on the board.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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100723

Original file (MD1100723.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge or change a narrative reason 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801216

Original file (ND0801216.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the Board determined the characterization of service was also appropriate based on the evidence of record. The NDRB advises the Applicant that, with respect to nonservice 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 (under honorable conditions) characterization.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902527

Original file (ND0902527.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant desires upgrade to re-enlist in the Navy. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601222

Original file (MD0601222.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Issue 3: (Equity) The Board determined the Applicant was involuntarily discharged based on a medical prognosis that the Applicant’s condition would unlikely change if retained. SEPARATION (20050701) SJA review (date): Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, MARINE CORPS RECRUIT DEPOT, SAN DIEGO CA 92140-5000 (20050707)Narrative Reason directed: DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENT DUE TO FRAUDULENT ENTRYCharacterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20050711 Additional Documents Considered...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400487

Original file (MD1400487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000993

Original file (ND1000993.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Applicant’s mental health issues, command administratively processed for separation. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900907

Original file (ND0900907.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on his time in service (20 days), lack of unusual circumstances in conduct and performance, and reason for separation, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service was appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION) and the narrative reason for...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401306

Similar Decisions