Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200226
Original file (MD1200226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20111108
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)       19940624 - 19940717     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19940718     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 19971208      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 20 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 65
MOS: 5811
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle O S R

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP:             SCM:             SPCM:            CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19960212 :       For failure to maintain Marine Corps weight standards by exceeding my maximum weight and percent of body fat.

- 19960925 :       For assignment to the weight control program for failure to maintain appropriate Marine Corps Height and Weight Standards. My height is 68 inches, my weight is 193 lbs. My weight reduction goal is 181 lbs.

- 19970107 :       For dereliction of duties in that you failed to properly deliver mail.

- 19970321 :       For failure to meet monthly goal(s) while assigned to the Weight Control Program. My height is 68 inches, my weight is 206 lbs. My weight goal is 181 lbs per month.

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: “ SHARPSHOOTER RIFLE BADGE, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, OVERSEAS SERVICE RIBBON ”

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. Paragraph 6215, WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 until 31 August 2001.
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 characterization was too harsh based on his in-service conduct , and he was inaccurately measured and discharged for weight control failure.
 2.       Post-service conduct.
Decision

 Date: 20 1 2 1119            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. 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 warnings and no commanding officers’ nonjudicial punishments or trial by courts-martial. The recor d 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 Applicant’s weight control failure , 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, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge characterization was too harsh based on his in-service conduct. The Applicant contends his discharge is improper , because he was inaccurately measured and discharged for weight control failure. A thorough review of the Applicant’s record shows the Applicant was given ample opportunity and time to correct his excessive weight , which started at 193 pounds and fluctuated up to 216 pounds over thirteen months. Pursuant to paragraph 6215, WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 August 1995 until 31 August 2001, he met the requirements for separation due to weight control failure. Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. An Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for Naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The Applicant’s service record reflects no significant retention counseling warnings or findings of any misconduct in violation of the UCMJ , with Proficiency and Conduct average s of 4.5/4.4 over 9 periods . The Applicant’s service was involuntarily terminated based solely on his weight control failure . 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. As such, it is appropriate to characterize that service under Honorable conditions. By unanimous vote , the NDRB voted to upgrade the characterization of the discharge to Honorable but not to change the narrative reason for separation. Relief granted.

Issue 2: (Decisional) (Equity) The Applicant submitted proof of post-service employment. Since full relief had been given in Issue 1, the NDRB did not consider this issue.
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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600904

    Original file (MD0600904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :941105: Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years.950607: Applicant’s Reporting Senior and Reviewing Officer reported approved alternate weight standard of 218 pounds on Applicant’s fitness report for period 950301 – 950403.960108: Applicant’s Reporting Senior and Reviewing Officer reported approved alternate weight standard of 220 pounds on Applicant’s fitness report for period 950403 – 960108.960208: Applicant referred to Credentialed...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500509

    Original file (MD0500509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Concerning your assignment to the Marine Corps Body composition program. Applicant counseled that he will be processed for administrative separation due to failure to maintain the Marine Corps standards. The Commanding Office is recommending that the Applicant receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions).

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500702

    Original file (MD0500702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Further, on 20030518 (six months after being assigned to the program), the Applicant was counseled for not makings satisfactory progress and not returning to her prescribed weight and body fat standards. Clearly, the Applicant’s performance and conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, falls well below that required for an...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600679

    Original file (MD0600679.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ex-Pvt, USMCDocket No. Decisional Issues Equity – Quality of service Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Character Reference ltr from T. L. S_, SSgt, USMC, dated November 30, 2000Three pages from Applicant’s service recordApplicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00664

    Original file (MD04-00664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970929 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper...

  • USMC | DRB | 1998_Marine | MD98-00437

    Original file (MD98-00437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E, effective 950818), Table 6-1, Guide for Characterization of Service, states characterization of service for a Marine separated under the provisions of paragraph 6215, weight control failure is either honorable or general (under honorable conditions) as determined by the Marine's service record. The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE;authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6215.The applicant was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00619

    Original file (MD00-00619.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records are reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 970106: Retention warning issued and counseled that failure to maintain personal appearance and weight standards would result in administrative discharge action.970715: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 981010: GCMCA [CO, MACG 38] directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401049

    Original file (MD1401049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19970711 - 19971107Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19971108Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20000225Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)18 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:56MOS: 0151Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00695

    Original file (MD01-00695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00695 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010420, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Recommended loss of 5 pounds per month and a total of 30 pounds within 180 days.990615: Counseling: Applicant assigned to the Weight Control Program to correct deficiency of not meeting height/weight standards. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600292

    Original file (MD0600292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    930106: Counseling: Applicant informed by Commanding Officer that Applicant is recommended but not eligible for reenlistment due to assignment to weight control and that he will be assigned an RE-3P reenlistment code upon separation.Service Record Book contains a partial Administrative Discharge package. According to applicable regulations, a member may be involuntarily separated for failure to meet height/weight standards when the sole reason for separation is failure to meet height/weight...