DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
 NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
                     DISCHARGE REVIEW
                   DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD01-00693

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010418, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010928.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  UNCHARACTERIZED/ FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6204.3.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I feel I was wrongfully discharged from the Marine Corps, since the trouble I was in was already settled a month before entering boot camp.  I was never convicted only charged with those crimes.

2.  I never understood whey they would (the Marine Corps) trained me so close to graduation, knowing the government spent a lot of money training me, and then sent me home.  So I S_ R. H_, IV (Applicant) am submitting this application with my desire to be a United States Marine.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Applicant Representative, (American Legion) letter of 9 Aug 2001 with comments/recommendations
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
B_ G. J_, Attorney at Law, letter of Jan 19, 2001
L_ F_, Prosecuting Attorney letter of May 25, 2000
Circuit Court of Raleigh County, WV Court Order (with sentencing order, restitution order) dated May 23, 2000 (3 pages)
Magistrate Court of Raleigh County, WV Complaint's Request for Dismissal dated March 31, 2000
Administrative Discharge Package (3 pages)
Waiver worksheet and subsequent disapproval  (2 pages) 
Police Record Check (9 pages)
Applicant's Recruit Information Card (9 pages)
Applicant's Record of Military Processing (3 pages) 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		000407 - 000424	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000425		Date of Discharge:  000807

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  03  13
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  58

Highest Rank:  Pvt

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  NMF*			Conduct:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

* No Marks Found in service record

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNCHARACTERIZED/FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6204.3.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

000425:	Security Clearance Application, applicant answered "No" to question concerning Police Record - with the exception of drug/alcohol use and speeding".

000615:	Waiver of preservice criminal record, based on Police Record Check, denied.

000724:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry into the U.S. Marine Corps .  The factual basis for this recommendation was applicant's admission to pre-service undisclosed police involvement.

000724:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

000802:	Commanding officer recommended discharge with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry into the U.S. Marine Corps .  The factual basis for this recommendation was applicant's admission to pre-service undisclosed police involvement.  

000802:	GCMCA [CG, MCRD/Eastern Recruiting Region, Parris Island] directed the applicant's discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 000807 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) reason defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  The applicant states the trouble he was in was already settled a month before entering boot camp.  The applicant was discharged for failing to report the extent of his involvement with the police and civilian courts, not necessarily for the actual offenses he was charged with.  Had he fully disclosed the facts of his case his enlistment may have been denied or postponed.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The Marine Corps learned of his police record on 000613.  A moral waiver for the applicant was requested by the Recruit Liaison Section and denied by the decision authority.
The applicant was discharged seven weeks later.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 until present, paragraph 6204, DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENT AND INDUCTION.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

If you believe that 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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “afls10.jag.af.mil”.  

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023