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

 ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD04-01098

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040618.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to remove fraudulent and defective enlistment.  The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20041112.  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.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character and narrative reason 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 stated

No issues were submitted by the Applicant.  Applicant indicated issues were attached to the application, but issues specifically designated for the NDRB to consider from the Applicant were not found.

Documentation

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

Three copies of DD Form 214
Letter from B_ L_ D_, Ph.D.
Reference letter from M_ C. B_
Three letters from Applicant’s mother
Letter from Applicant’s father
Two letters from Applicant
Letter from B_ C_, US Senator
Letter from HQMC, OLA
Twenty-seven 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)		030905 - 040112	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  040113		Date of Discharge:  040129

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  00  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  35

Highest Rank:  Pvt			MOS:  9900

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  None			Conduct:  None

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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:

040120:	Medical evaluation by Mental Health Unit, MCRD, SDCA.  Applicant stated he was going to kill himself and reported a significant history of suicidal ideation and attempts.  Applicant denied prior psychiatric treatment but reported five past “attempts” which “people walked in on.”
	Psychologist recommended entry level separation.  Applicant posed high risk for self-harm.

	AXIS I:  Adjustment D/O
	
	AXIS II: Borderline personality D/O

040121:	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 the Applicant’s failure upon enlistment to divulge his pre-service medical condition (borderline personality with suicide ideation).

040126:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Not recommended for reenlistment and assigned RE Code of RE-3F by reason of fraudulent enlistment due to borderline personality with suicide ideation.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

040126:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for an uncharacterized discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to a fraudulent entry into the U.S. Marine Corps.

040126:  	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.

040129:	GCMCA [CG, MCRD, SDCA] 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 20040129 with an entry level separation 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).

The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.  An enlistment, induction, or period of service is fraudulent when there has been deliberate material misrepresentation, 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.  Upon evaluation by a properly credentialed psychologist on 20040120, the Applicant reported a significant history of suicide ideation and attempts.  Had these facts been known at the time of the Applicant’s processing for enlistment, it is reasonable to expect that the Applicant would not have been enlisted.  The statements and documentation provided by the Applicant for the Board’s review do not refute the presumption that the Applicant deliberately misrepresented facts to gain enlistment.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  Relief denied.

The Board’s regulations limit its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  The Applicant’s claim that he was mentally and physically abused by his drill instructors does not change the facts that led to his administrative separation for fraudulent enlistment or refute the presumption that his discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, MCO P1900.16F), effective 
01 September 2001 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