Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701137
Original file (MD0701137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-PFC, USMCR
MD07-01137
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070817        Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVE
Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6213     

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Discharge erroneous as reserve contract was completed so n o longer required to drill.

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .      

Date: 20 08 0 207                  Location: Washington D.C.         Representation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 ( Propriety ). The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The NDRB reviewed all of the available records, supporting documents, facts, elements of discharge, evidence submitted by the Applicant, and circumstances unique to this case. A particular circumstance of interest was the Applicant’s MCTFS Basic Individual record clearly showing in numerous places the end date for mandatory drills as 20021103. The NDRB noted that drills periods for which he was discharged with a characterization as under other than honorable conditions were all after that date. The Applicant’s claims that he returned all issued gear before his last mandatory drill date was credible. The NDRB found that there w as an i mpropriety in the Applicant’s discharge action, is convinced that it was prejudicial to the Applicant, and therefore an error in the characterization did occur.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries , Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found that

Summary of Service

 Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     19960923 -                    Active: 19970527 – 19971031      HON
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19961104               Years Contracted : 8 ; Extension:                   Date of Discharge: 20030728
Length of Service : Yrs Mths    D ys                          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment: 19     AFQT: 73          MOS: 0311 Highest Rank: CPL
Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):      NOT FOUND IN RECORD               
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): AFRM, R IFLE SS

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 199610 25 :        Applicant signs Marine Corps policy understanding the 6 year drilling obligation and the 2 year inactive obligation for USMCR.

20000106 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for inability to handle stress in your civilian life and perform your duties in the Marine Corps Reserve. Discharge warning issued. Applicant signed entry.

20000109 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for inability to be at your appointed place of duty on time. Discharge warning issued. Applicant signed entry.

2001 0311 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for being absent for annual training 200 10203 – 2001 0217 . Discharge warning issued. Applicant signed entry.

20010422:        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for being absent for duty on 20010420. Discharge warning issued. Applicant signed entry.

20021215 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to attend drills on 20021213 – 20021215. Declared an unsatisfactory participant in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Applicant not available for signature.

20030112 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to attend drills on 20030110 – 20030112. Declared an unsatisfactory participant in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Applicant not available for signature.

20030115:        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for unsatisfactory mandatory drill participation. Being recommended for administrative separation. Applicant not available for signature.

20030209 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to attend drills on 20030207 – 20030209. Declared an unsatisfactory participant in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Discharge warning issued. Applicant not available for signature.

20030406 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to attend drills on 20030404 – 20030406. Declared an unsatisfactory participant in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Being recommended for administrative separation. Applicant not available for signature.

20030518 :        MARCORSEPMAN 6105 counseling for failure to attend drills on 20030516 – 20030518. Declared an unsatisfactory participant in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Discharge warning issued. Applicant not available for signature.


Discharge Process

 Date Notified:  
Basis for Discharge:     
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       
Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation:   

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                 
Rights Elected at Notification:
 Consult with Counsel             
Obtain Copies of Documents               
Submit Statement(s) (date)               
Administrative Board             

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
SJA review (date):      
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING GENERAL, HEADQU A RTERS, 4 TH MARINE DIVISION ( 20030728 )
Basis for discharge directed:  
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20030728      

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)      

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 01 Sep 2001 until Present.
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 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 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d 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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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.
Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD . ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.

Board Membership: 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:

 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101153

    Original file (MD1101153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Based on the Applicant’s failure to participate in the Marine Corps Reserve, command administratively processed for separation. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700043

    Original file (MD0700043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. NOT FOUND IN...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00664

    Original file (MD02-00664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I do promise that the unacceptable behavior conducted previously will never take place again.Respectfully, Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 One page from Applicant's service recordJob reference dated March 21, 2002 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300551

    Original file (MD1300551.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6213 of the Marine...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700096

    Original file (MD0700096.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Automatic Upgrades - 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600559

    Original file (MD0600559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Applicant notified by certified mail of recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation due to excessive missed drills.940107: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory drill participation. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00202

    Original file (MD04-00202.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:Issue 1: “I was recently married at the time and my wife became pregnant. My daughters condition stabilized and my son is in school. Issue 1: The Applicant stated his discharge was unjust because “his (life) had to be redirected” even though “(t)he USMC was important to (him).” The Applicant signed a contract on 970818, while enlisting into the USMCR, that acknowledged his understanding of the requirement to participate in...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700817

    Original file (MD0700817.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Narrative Reason: UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN THE READY RESERVEAuthority: MARCORSEPMAN 6213 ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00561

    Original file (MD01-00561.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980527: GCMCA, Commander, Marine Forces Reserve, directed the applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve. Relief denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “My service was good standing.” The Board determined this issue has no merit. He was properly counseled and notified of impending disciplinary actions and finally discharged.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100891

    Original file (MD1100891.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority reviewed the command’s recommendations and the supporting documentation and determined that a preponderance of the evidence supported the specific basis for discharge (MARCORSEPMAN - Paragraph 6213, Unsatisfactory Participation in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve). As such, the Separation Authority approved the discharge; additionally, he determined that the proper and warranted characterization of the Applicant’s service was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions...