Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901646

Original file (MD0901646.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090526

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)       19980915 - 19990822     Active:          19990823 - 20021010

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021011     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20050517      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 07 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
MOS: 1371
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( NFIR ) / ( )        Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      CoA (2) MM LoA (4) CoC Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:
- 20031027 :      For exceeding height, weight, and body fat standards.
- 20041209 :      For unsatisfactory performance in not meeting height, weight, and body fat standards.
- 20050204 :       For failure to meet height, weight, and body fat standards (47 lbs over maximum allowable weight).

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 990823 UNTIL 021011 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE , 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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant seeks an upgrade to use the G.I. Bill.
2. The Applicant believes she should be upgraded based on her record of service.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0304 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings; all concerning her exceeding height, weight and body fat standards. The Applicant was first assigned on the body composition program (BCP) on 27 October 2003, due to being 185 pounds and having 40% body fat ; which is 44 pounds/14% BF beyond the Marine Corps standards for a 63 inch female . The Applicant was evaluated by a medical officer on 30 September 2003 and found her condition was not a factor of an underlying cause or associated disease. The Applicant was given another 6-month extention on 26 April 2004. On 26 October 2004, afte r a year on BCP, the Applicant lost 12 pounds, but gained 3% body fat. Again, the Applicant was evaluated by a medical officer on 7 December 2004 and again found her condition was not a factor of an underlying cause or associated disease. Based on the Applicant ’s failure to conform to height, weight and body fat standards , command administratively processed for separation. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority. The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to use the G.I. Bill. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge should be upgraded based on her record of service, which was good although she was unable to conform to the Marine Corps height, weight and body fat standards during her second enlistment. Despite a Marine’s prior record of se rvice, certain aspects of one’s service, even though isolate d from the rest of their performance, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintai n proper order and discipline. The command properly counseled the Applicant and gave her every opportunity to conform to Marine Corps standards. Medical doctors set a weight reduction goal of one pound per week. The Applicant lost one pound per month. The NDRB opined that the Applicant’s failure to comply was the r esult of apathy and lack of self discipline , which does not meet the standard for an Honorable discharge . The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper and warranted. 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews , Employment/Educational Opportunities and Post-Service Conduct .

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disable d American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.

Employment/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 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (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 at 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 in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 | 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901793

Original file (MD0901793.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 28 March 2008, eight months into the BCP program, the Applicant was 197 pounds and 22 percent body fat, still five pounds and four percent body fat over the maximum allowable standard. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002167

Original file (MD1002167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant contends he should have received an Honorable characterization of service since he was separated for his weight, not misconduct. ” 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0901360

Original file (MD0901360.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20030924 - 20040426 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20040427Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge: 20060921 Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s)26 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT: 34 MOS: 0161 Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): () / () Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
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 | 2011_Marine | MD1101006

Original file (MD1101006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400195

Original file (MD1400195.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

MD14-00195 ,ex-PFC, USMC CURRENT DISCHARGE AND APPLICANT’S REQUEST Application Received: 20131118 Characterization of Service Received: (per DD 214) GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) Narrative Reason for Discharge: (per DD 214) WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE Authority for Discharge: (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 6215 [WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE] Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: HONORABLE Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301692

Original file (MD1301692.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902230

Original file (MD0902230.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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900488

Original file (MD0900488.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable based on the fact he was involuntarily discharged from the Marine Corps due to a condition not a disability. 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901646

Similar Decisions