ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20090325
Characterization of Service Received:    
Narrative Reason for Discharge:    ERRONEOUS ENTRY, OTHER
Authority for Discharge:   MARCORSEPMAN 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:  
	Narrative Reason change to:  MEDICAL OR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	USMCR (DEP)	20070404 - 20070422  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20070423	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Months
Date of Discharge:  20071030	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  08  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  51
MOS:  9971
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   () /  ()	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  

Periods of UA/CONF:  

NJP:   	

SCM:   	

SPCM:   		

CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20070816:	Concerning your mental condition (delayed post-traumatic stress disorder), which interferes with your duties, specifically, the inability to participate in rigorous exercises, conditioning hikes, and field day.

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:		Substance Abuse:		Criminal Records:	
	Family/Personal Status: 		Community Service:		References:	
	Additional Statements:
		From Applicant:		From Representation:		From Congress member:	

	Other Documentation:  

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	He claims his delayed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was due to boot camp maltreatment, not his childhood in war-torn Bosnia.
2.    He served 192 days of active service and is eligible for an honorable discharge. 

Decision

Date:  20091015		Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  ERRONEOUS ENTRY, OTHER.

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 evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The Applicant’s record of service reflects no misconduct that resulted in nonjudicial punishment (NJP) or court-martial.  The Applicant signed a counseling chit (NAVMC 118) on 20070816 for his mental condition—delayed  PTSD associated with a combat environment (Bosnia) prior to entering the Marine Corps—which interfered with his duties, specifically, the inability to participate in rigorous exercises, conditioning hikes, and field duty.  The Applicant chose not make a statement against his diagnosis.  Per his clinical reports, the Applicant manifested a severe inability to adjust to the demands of the Marine Corps.  His mental health care providers strongly believed the Applicant had a history of untreated mental health problems, and recommended that an erroneous enlistment separation be pursued by the command.   

Issue 1:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends his delayed PTSD was due to boot camp, where he was physically and emotionally abused by his drill instructors.  In his application, he reports that after receiving physical abuse from a drill instructor, he was severely harassed after that drill instructor was allegedly relieved.  The Applicant also provided a rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical and Regional Officer Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, that determined a “service connection for post traumatic stress disorder is granted…”  Per his health record, the Applicant was seen by four mental heath providers during his active duty time and all diagnosed him with delayed PTSD.  The Applicant’s primary clinical psychologist stated, “The client has been diagnosed with delayed post-traumatic stress disorder stemming from his exposure to a combat environment (as a child in Bosnia) prior to enlisting in the USMC.” The psychologist also noted that, “The service member manifests a severe inability to adjust to the demands of the USMC. Given that this clinical provider strongly believes that the service member has a history of untreated mental health problems, it is highly recommended that an erroneous entry separation be pursued by the command.”  The NDRB determined that the Applicant met the requirements to be separated by reason of erroneous enlistment/reenlistment.  

Issue 2:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant is requesting an “Honorable” characterization because he served 192 days of active service, which is greater than the 180-day requirement for an “Uncharacterized” characterization of discharge. He claims his separation package had to be resubmitted because of improper paperwork and, after everything was fixed, it was processed after his serving more than 180 days.  For the Applicant’s information, the 180-day requirement for an “Uncharacterized” discharge is determined by the date of the service member’s notification as to the command’s intent to initiate separation proceedings—not the actual completion of processing.  The NDRB did not have a copy of the Applicant’s notification documentation.  However, in block 6.c. (Purpose of Examination) of the Report of Medical History of 10 September 2007, the stated reason for the exam was  “separation,” thus indicating the Applicant was notified of his pending separation on that date or earlier, which was 140 days from his date of enlistment. The NDRB 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 service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall   and the narrative reason for separation shall remain ERRONEOUS ENTRY, OTHER.

Within his application, the Applicant included allegations of abuse by drill instructors.  The NDRB invites him to contact the Inspector General of the Marine Corps to request a formal inquiry into this matter.

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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct.

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.

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 Association of Service Disable 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 his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 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