Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00930
Original file (MD03-00930.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00930

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030430. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests 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 20040401. 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 of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: (GENERAL) UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. Under current standards, I would not receive the type of discharge I did.

2. I received letters of recommendation.

3. I was close to finishing my tour that it was unfair to give me discharge.

4. My discharge was based on many offenses, but they were mostly only minor offenses.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960213               Date of Discharge: 990409

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 01 27
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 78

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.1 (7)                       Conduct: 4.1 (7)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960112:  Enlistment medical examination: Height: 69.5”. Weight: 205. Note: Max 215, Min 123.

960919:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Substandard academic performance and the inability to assimilate technical material. My performance is below minimum academic standards and I have been disenrolled and reclassified.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
980130:  CO referred Applicant to Credentialed Health Care Provider since he does not meet acceptable Marine Corps Standards with a weight of 229 lbs and body fat of 33.0 percent, with maximum weight of 186 lbs and advised Applicant that the loss of 7.1 lbs per month and total of 43 pounds within a 6 month period is a realistic goal. Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider did not agree with goal set by Commanding Officer. Comments: Physiological weight loss should not exceed more than 4 lbs/month. Suggested a weight loss of 4 lbs/month for a total of 43 lbs over 10 months

980130:  Applicant's physical condition is not due to a pathological disorder, fit for participation in physical exercise program.

980203:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to conform to Marine Corps height and weight standards.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980406:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to maintain minimum physical fitness standards, specifically, your failure of the PFT on 980225.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
980728:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:
 Specification: Fail to obey SqdnO 1050.1E on 980703 by visiting Mexico without an Out-of-Bounds pass.
Awarded forfeiture of $568.00 per month for 1 month, restriction for 50 days. Forfeiture and restriction for 20 days suspended for 6 months. Not appealed.
980922:  CO referred Applicant to Credentialed Health Care Provider since he does not meet acceptable Marine Corps Standards with a weight of 207 lbs, and body fat of 27 percent and advised Applicant that the loss of 7 lbs per month and total of 21 pounds within a 3 month period is a realistic goal.

980922:  Applicant's physical condition is not due to a pathological disorder, fit for participation in physical exercise program. Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider did not agree with goal set by Commanding Officer. Comments: Weight loss should not be sustained greater than 4-5 lbs/month. Member shows some progress but will require vigorous efforts to make dietary changes in conjunction with regular exercise. Recommend 5 lbs/month for 3 months with reevaluation at that time.

990115:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to follow instructions and orders given by your NCO’s, specifically in conducting a field day at Barracks 724 on 981210.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
990208:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties. The basis for discharge is your failure to make satisfactory progress in conforming to Marine Corps height and weight standards.

990210:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted 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.

990226:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to unsatisfactory performance of duties. Applicant started weight control program at 223 lbs. Current weight is 206 lbs. Weight goal was 186 lbs.

990311:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Repeated infractions of being UA from your appointed place of duty.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
990323:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing] advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the Applicant's discharge was directed with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason unsatisfactory performance.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990409 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to unsatisfactory performance of duties (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 1-4. A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion, adverse counseling entries on other occasions, and failure to conform to height/weight standards. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. The criteria for discharge under honorable conditions (general) has not changed since the Applicant’s discharge. An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate. Relief denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. 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. Paragraph 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 to Present, states that a Marine may be separated if the Marine is unqualified for further service by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

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      


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600904

    Original file (MD0600904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :941105: Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years.950607: Applicant’s Reporting Senior and Reviewing Officer reported approved alternate weight standard of 218 pounds on Applicant’s fitness report for period 950301 – 950403.960108: Applicant’s Reporting Senior and Reviewing Officer reported approved alternate weight standard of 220 pounds on Applicant’s fitness report for period 950403 – 960108.960208: Applicant referred to Credentialed...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00052

    Original file (MD03-00052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    931115: Applicant has been determined to be overweight and was directed to meet the following weight reduction goal: 4 pounds per month. Specifically, failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards. [Failed to meet USMC weight standards on weight control extension and is therefore recommended for separation from the naval service.]

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00597

    Original file (MD04-00597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant ’s second assignment.020515: Counseled concerning deficiency, specifically, unsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps weight control program as evidenced by continued weight gain and only minimal weight loss, failure to adhere to my diet and weight loss plan, advise of assistance available and corrective actions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00139

    Original file (MD01-00139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    970221: Applicant assigned to weight control program due to determination to be overweight and are directed to meet the following weight reduction goal: 45 pounds per month. 970225: Weight: 222, Body Fat: 29.9% 970303: Weight: 220, Body Fat: 29.9% 970311: Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal due to assignment to weight control IAW MCO P1400.3 paragraph 3F through 3N. 971209 Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a General...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600859

    Original file (MD0600859.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, discharge warning issued.20010111: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (You have been assigned to the Marine Corps weight control program for a period of six months. Post-service conduct.Regarding Issue 1, the Board determined that this is not an issue which can form the basis of relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601021

    Original file (MD0601021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided.970611: SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.970617: GCMCA, Commanding General, Marine Corps Base Hawaii directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. You may view DoD...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00427

    Original file (MD99-00427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00427 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990202, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I was overweight when I was enlisted in to the marines and because I gained the weight over the course of a few years I was released with a General Under Honorable Conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00668

    Original file (MD00-00668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I had a problem with weight control, and was discharged because of it.To begin with, I had a weight problem when I went into the Marine Corps, and had to go on a delayed enlistment program to give me time to loose some weight. I request that you look into this situation and assist in getting the discharge upgraded, so that I may receive my VA Education Assistance benefit.your assistance Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00664

    Original file (MD04-00664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970929 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00237

    Original file (MD04-00237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Nevertheless I never received the response until the day my punishment was completed, and the appeal had been singed and dated 3 days after my appeal was submitted. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.