Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900403
Original file (MD0900403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081202
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       19970320 - 19970721     Active:   19970722- 20001003 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20001004     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20030926      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 22 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
MOS: 1812/8152
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol KCM

Periods of CONF :

NJP:
- 200 1 0920 :      Article 86 (UA )
         Article 107 (False official statement )
         Awarded: Suspended: for 6 months

- 20021003 :      Article 86 (UA), 4 specifications
         Awarded: Suspended: for 2 months for 6 months


- 20030311 :      Article 1 34 ( Being indebted ) , 2 specifications
         Awarded: Suspended : for 2 months for 6 months

SCM:     SPCM:   CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20011102: For failure to maintain weight standards set forth in MCO 6100.10B
- 20020915: For financial irresponsibility: the command received a letter from the Navy Exchange for an outstanding balance of $ 87.50, and a letter from Omni Financial for a delinquent account of $615.44
- 20021022: For failure to maintain proper weight standards per MCO P62100.12 and second assignment to BCP.

- 20021211: For failure to meet monthly body fat and weight reductions goals.
- 20030109: For failure to meet monthly body fat and weight reductions goals.
 - 20030623 :       For unsatisfactory performance of duties and pattern of misconduct.

- 20030312:      For failure to meet monthly body fat and weight reduction goals, specifically you failure to meet reduction goals of 7.3lbs or 1% body fat per month.
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 :




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Ree nlist into the military.
2. Upgrade reentry ( RE ) c ode.
3. Discharge was too harsh based on his military records and proficiency/conduct marks.

Decision

 Date: 20 0 9 618             Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

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

 : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his d ischarge was too harsh based on his military records and proficiency/conduct (Pro/Con) marks. 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 seven NAMVC 118(11) ( Page 11) warnings and three NJP s for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (UA. five specifications ) ; Article 107 (False official statement); and Article 134 (Being indebted, two specifications ) . Violation of Article s 107 and 134 are considered serious violations which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but instead opted for an administrative discharge. When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. Characterization of service as G eneral ( Under H onorable C onditions) 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. Unfortunately, the Board could not determine the Applicant’s final Pro/Con marks and he did not provide any documentation to support his contention. Based on the seriousness of the offenses committed, length of service , and lack of mitigating factors, the Board determined the awarded characterization was appropriate.

For the Applicant’s edification, t he NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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. Docum entation to help support a post- service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Besides the Applicant’s DD Form 293, the Applicant provided no documentation for review. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. Sho uld the Applicant feel his post- service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. The Board determined the charact erization of service received, General ( Under Honorable Conditions) , was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service , the UCMJ violations involved, and the lack of post- service documentation .

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation s of the UCMJ, Article 107 (False official statement) and Article 134 (Being indebted) .

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 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 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 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601151

    Original file (MD0601151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You have four months from this date to reduce your weight to 214 lbs, or below and/or reduce your body fat to 18% or below; however you may also raise your PFT to a first class score while maintaining 22% or less body fat percentage within the time period to be removed from the program. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified: 20050615Basis for Discharge:WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURELeast Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Record Supports Narrative...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900040

    Original file (MD0900040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.The Applicant provided evidence of employment since November 2006, documentation of vocational training and education, and several character...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101865

    Original file (MD1101865.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his record of service warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge to Honorable. Based on the Applicant’s failure to meet those standards after being assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP), his command administratively processed him for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901895

    Original file (MD0901895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant was not separated for medical reasons but for failure to meet assigned weight and body fat standards.The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 to 31 August 2001, however, does allow for an Honorable discharge for servicemembers separated for unsatisfactory performance (paragraph 6206).After a review of the Applicant’s service record, the NDRB did find that his service met the standard for honorable conduct. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501081

    Original file (MD1501081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200003

    Original file (MD1200003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700044

    Original file (MD0700044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. Body fat 28.1%, weight 152.Recommendation: continued weight loss program of 2 pounds a month, counseled re role of diet/exercise in weight loss plan.Medical Entry: Reason for visit: Second time on weight control.Assessment: Current...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900288

    Original file (MD0900288.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE.Discussion :().The Applicant contends after 12 plus years of decorated and faithful service, he believes his discharge, due to weight control, does not rate a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” and his misconduct was due to mitigating circumstances (family issues). The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length...

  • 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801612

    Original file (MD0801612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the...