Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000494
Original file (MD1000494.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20091127
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)       20000309 - 20001204     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20001205     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20041204      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r ( s ) M on th ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 39
MOS: 0311
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle EM (W/ 1 STAR) PUC CoA

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20031022 :       For failure to maintain Marine Corps weight standards/personal appearance standards, and understand that my condition is not a result of my physical condition.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ MARINE CORPS GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, COMBAT ACTION RIBBON, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL-MARINE CORPS, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (W/1 STAR), NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, NAVY MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION, PRESIDENTIAL UNIT CITATION, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION, RIFLE SHARPSHOOTER BADGE ”

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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation :           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present,
Paragraph 1005, DISCHARGE FOR EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR FULFILLMENT OF SERVICE OBLIGATION .

 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 contends his discharge is inequitable , because he finished his contract.

Decision

Date: 20110304 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warning that concern ed his inability to stay within Marine Corps physical standards. Otherwise, the Applicant completed his obligated service to the Marine Corps but was not allowed to reenlist due to his weight - control issues. Upon completion of his active service, the Marine Corps discharged the Applicant according to standards of performance and conduct as determined by MCO P1610.7 series ( Performance Evaluation System ) , MCO P1070.12 series ( Individual Records Administration Manual ) , and customs of the service , which form the primary basis for determining characterization of service. Minimum acceptable average proficiency and conduct markings during an enlistment are 3.0 and 4.0 , respectively. Failure of a Marine to achieve either of these standards is evidence of significant negative aspects, outweighing all but the most meritorious military records. Marines who do not achieve these standards should not receive an H onorable discharge.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because he finished his contract and his characterization was based on his height and weight. The NDRB carefully reviewed the Applicant’s service record and found that the command followed the guidelines mentioned above. However , the NDRB determined that the command did not adequately document the Applicant’s failure to maintain height and weight standards , beyond just giving him low proficiency and conduct markings. Besides his failure to meet the physical standards of the Marine Corps, which was poorly documented, the NDRB determined that an upgrade would be appropriate in this case. Relief granted.

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 .



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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801642

    Original file (MD0801642.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The separation processing can be based on one of two paragraphs in the Marine Corps Separations Manual: Paragraph 6215 which is used when the sole reason for separation is failure to meet weight and body fat standards, and the Marine's performance and conduct otherwise conform with established standards; or paragraph 6206 which is used when a Marine is separated for failure to conform to weight standards as a result of apathy or a lack of self discipline.The Applicant’s command, based on the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200226

    Original file (MD1200226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record did reflect the Applicant failed to meet established height and weight standards after being placed in the weight control program for 13 months. Based on the evidence of record, coupled with the fact that no reason for discharge was contemplated by the command prior to the Applicant’s weight control failure, the NDRB determined the quality of the Applicant’s service met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel. Since full relief had been...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101050

    Original file (MD1101050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 .Since fifteen years from the date of the Applicant’s discharge have elapsed, he is not...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900170

    Original file (MD0900170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300961

    Original file (MD1300961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. In accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN), the characterization of service for administrative separations due to Weight Control Failure will be Honorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions) as warranted by the member’s service record. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500929

    Original file (MD1500929.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 change to HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201966

    Original file (MD1201966.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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700270

    Original file (MD0700270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Date Notified: 19960313 Basis for Discharge:FAILURE TO CONFORM TO THE MARINE CORPS HEIGHT/WEIGHT STANDARDSUNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE DUE TO: UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES WHILE ASSIGNED TO THE WEIGHT CONTROL PROGRAMLeast Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:199603132Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) (NOT FOUND IN...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201212

    Original file (MD1201212.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 15 years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101960

    Original file (MD1101960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s Pro/Con mark evaluation average, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service upon separation was equitable per the applicable orders and directives in effect at the time of his separation. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and record entries, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and...