Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900192
Original file (MD0900192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081104
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to: CONVENIENCE

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     20020610 - 20020617     Active:           20020618 - 20030118 HON
                                   20030127 - 20030713 HON
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20020610     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050504      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 25 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: NFIR
MOS: 1833
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): NFIR         Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA / CONF : NJP: SCM: SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

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 Representat ion :   From Congress member :
Other Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6213 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 1 September 2001 until p resent.
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 .

C. Paragraph 2304 of the Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, (MCO P1001R.1J), effective 10 March 1999 to present .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Record of service.
2. Attempted to transfer to the Air Force.
3. Mistreatment by unit.
 4. Irregularities in discharge package.
 5. School requirements conflicted with drill obligations.

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 0212            Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall UNSAT PARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE .
Discussion

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade due to his record of 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 Applicant’s record of service was marred by eleven missed Inactive Duty Training (IDT) periods on 6-8 February, 30 April-2 May, and 5 June 2004. For the edification of the Applicant, a Marine may be processed for “Unsat isfactory Participation in the Ready Reserve” after missing nine IDT periods. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s documented unexcused absences from IDT provided a sufficient basis for the command to initiate administrative separation proceedings. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate based on the record of service.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because his unit mistreated him by not allow ing him to transfer to the Air Force. The Applicant contends he approached his unit in the spring of 2004 with a request for an inter-service transfer to the Air Force. T he Applicant did not provide any documentation to support th e claim he was mistreated by his command . For the edification of the Applicant, the procedures for requesting an inter-service transfer are given in MCO P1001R.1J. This order specifically requires Marines to be in a satisfactory drill status at the time an inter-service transfer request is made. T he Boa rd does not consider the Applicant’s request being denied as mistreatment ; the Applicant was not in a satisfactory drill status in the s pring of 2004 as evidenced by his missed IDTS in February 2004 and therefore was not eligible to transfer until after his missed IDT ’ s were made up. Ag a in, the record of evidence does not show the missed IDT periods where ever made up . The NDRB determined the command was acting within established procedure and the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate ; an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends irregularities in his discharge process make his discharge improper. The Applicant submitted a letter from Manpower Management Division, Headquarters Marine Corps to support this contention. The NDRB rejects the contention. The “irregularities” poin ted out in this letter do not change the legitimacy of the discharge . Specifically the letter notes the Applicant was paid for IDT ’ s on 3 March, 4 April, and 6 April 2004 . While this is an accurate statement , it does not change the fact the Applicant accrued eleven unexcused IDT absences on alternate dates. As discussed under Issue 1 above, administrative separation proceedings can be initiated after nine unexcused absences from IDT ’ s; this requirement was clearly satisfied prior to initiating separation proceedings. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because his school commitments interfered with his drill obligations. Specifically, the Applicant contends his summer internship between 28 May 2004 and August 2004 lead to the missed IDT ’ s which resulted in his separation. Again, the record of evidence clearly



contradicts the Applicant’s contention. Ten of the eleven missed drills occurred before the internship began on 28 May and there is no documentation, nor mention, of attempts to reschedule missed drill periods . The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found


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 or is referred to a court-martial fo r 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 other medical related reasons. ” 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 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 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00757

    Original file (MD04-00757.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500210

    Original file (MD0500210.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00210 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20041020. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with Title 32, CFR, Section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part I, Paragraph 1.20, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00243

    Original file (MD02-00243.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.971114: Applicant advised of 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.971207: Counseled for unsatisfactory participation in the SMCR, specifically unexcused absence from IDT on 971206 and 971207. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00063

    Original file (MD04-00063.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. th Marine Division] directed the Applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00413

    Original file (MD02-00413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00413 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020214, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Applicant not available for signature.001109: Commanding Officer notified the Applicant of unsatisfactory drill participation via certified letter.001203: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00021

    Original file (MD03-00021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00021 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020925, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. While the Board commends the Applicant for the positive accomplishments he has made since his discharge, the Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the offense for which he was discharged. Marine Corps Reserve Administrative Management Manual, MCO P1001R.1, Chapter 3, Reserve...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501085

    Original file (MD0501085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant chose not to make a statement.930516: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to PFC for the FY93 prom month of April because of being in a bad drill status. 940617: GCMCA, Commanding General, Marine Reserve Force, directed the Applicant's discharge as under other than honorable conditions by reason of failure to participate (reserve not on active duty). The Applicant should have been discharged on 19930922.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801766

    Original file (MD0801766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501457

    Original file (MD0501457.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the future, if you are unable to attend any scheduled IDT, you will contact the 1st SGT prior to the scheduled drill for further instructions. Applicant is administratively reduced to Private First Class due to unsatisfactory participation, specifically, failure to attend scheduled drills and annual training while a member of the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. Further, the Applicant received 3 retention warnings, was not recommended for promotion on 2 occasions, and was issued an...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00666

    Original file (MD01-00666.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00666 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010410, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 000727: GCMCA [Commander, MarForRes] directed the applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of failure to...