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

 ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00985

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020701, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030331.  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, as submitted

Extracted from DD Form 149, Block 9.

1.  I am challenging allegations I never gave false information to get into military.  The actual condition that I was discharge for was explosive disorder, which would fall under medical.

Extracted from letter to Veterans Affairs dated October 30, 2001

2.  I am writing to inform you that information on my discharge report is false.  On the report it states that I am visibly unstable, "says he has all his issued items in his sea bag, But doesn’t know where it is or if all issued items are still inside his seabag".  That statement was fabricated.  It also states that I gave false statements on my SF 93.  There are many false allegations.  I have never had mental illness or been under the care of any Doctor.  I was never abused as a child.  I never lied or stated any false statement to my recruiters.  There was a sense of urgency to leave MCRD.  I did get a little shook up, and did feel like hurting specific individuals.  But that is what boot camp makes you feel.  The rest of the report is not true.  I would like this to be reviewed so I can be cleared of all false allegations.

P.S If you have any questions Please call (number deleted).

Documentation

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

Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 4 and 1)
DD Form 149
Letter to Veterans Affairs dated October 30, 2001
Fifteen pages from Applicant's service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		001028 - 010116	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010117		Date of Discharge:  010202

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  00  16
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  28			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  8/10		AFQT:  31

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 the 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:

010124:	Medical evaluation by MCRD, MHU:
	AXIS I:  Adjustment disorder, unspecified.
	 	   Intermittent explosive disorder.
	AXIS II: Antisocial traits (per history).

010130:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an entry level separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry into the U.S. Marine Corps.

010130:	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.

010125:	Commanding Officer recommended an uncharacterized discharge 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 due to the failure upon enlistment to divulge a preservice medical condition (intermittent explosive disorder) which would have effected eligibility at time of enlistment.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim):  SNR is visibly unstable, says he has all his issued items in his seabag but doesn't know it if is all "still" inside his seabag.  SNR says family is aware of his condition.  Gave false info on SF 93.  Concur w/RLS.  ELS.  SNR is a MOT disclosure for previous mental illness.  SNR was diagnosed by MHU with intermittent explosive disorder.  SNR states he was abused as a child & was under the care of a mental health physician for months; this information was not disclosed to MEPS/Recruiter.  Recommend ELS medical/fraud. 

010201:	GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, CA] directed the Applicant's uncharacterized discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry into the U.S. Marine Corps.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 010202 with uncharacterized service by reason of 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).

Issues 1 and 2.  The Board found that the Applicant’s statements and information provided to support his claim that he was improperly processed for separation for fraudulent entry were not sufficient to refute the presumption of regularity concerning his discharge.  Relief is therefore denied.

By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service as “uncharacterized” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance or conduct which would merit an “honorable” characterization.  The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than one month in the military to warrant a change of discharge.  With respect to non-service related administrative matters, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) characterization.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity is evident 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.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant 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.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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 “afls14.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