Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400025
Original file (MD1400025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20131008
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)       20040728 - 20050619     Active:   20050620 - 20090611

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20090612     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20110422      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea r M on ths 11 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
MOS: 0431 / 0151
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): ( ) / ( )    Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA / CONF :

NJP: SCM: SPCM: CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20110311 :       For failing the remedial Marine Corps Combat Fitness Test (CFT) on 11 March 2011

- 20110404 :      For the following deficiencies: failing a semi-annual physical fitness test (PFT) on 25 June 2010; failing a semi-annual CFT on 15 December 2010; and failing all three portions of the remedial CFT conducted on 11 March 201 1 .

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 :        





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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade t o qualify for the G.I. Bill.
2.       The Applicant would like his RE-Code changed to RE-1A.
3 .       The Applicant contends he was not provided proper leadership while in the Remedial Physical Conditioning Program (RPCP).
4 .       The Applicant contends his discharge, after six years of service, for failing a Physical Fitness Test (PFT) and Combat Fitness Test (CFT), is inequitable.
5 .       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants an upgrade to Honorable.

Decision

 Date: 20 1 4 0417            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 that 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 in his second enlistment included 6105 counseling warnings . The Applicant’s command administratively processed him for separation for Unsatisfactory Performance based on failing two consecutive fitness tests. When notified of a dministrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant right to consult with a qualified counsel but waived his right to submit a written statement .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to q ualify for the G.I. Bill. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing e ducational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. The Applicant is encouraged to reapply with the Department of Veterans Affairs for G.I. Bill benefits based on his first Honorable enlistment.

Issue 2: (Nondecisional) The Applicant would like his RE-Code changed to RE-1A. 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 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was not provided proper leadership while in the RPCP . The Applicant was assigned to the RPCP following his failure of the PFT on 25 June 2010 . The Applicant was reassigned to the RPCP for failing the CFT on 15 December 2010. When assigned to the RPCP, the Applicant was advised that he was responsible for maintaining physical fitness standards and that failure to maintain those standards may result in administrative separation based on unsatisfactory performance . The Applicant failed a remedial CFT on 11 March 2011 and was subsequently processed for administrative separation. While the Applicant may feel his failure to maintain physical fitness standards was due to a lack of leadership, it was clearly his responsibility to maintain those standards. The Applicant’s failure to maintain physical fitness standards demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service. The NDRB found the discharge process was proper and the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.



4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge, after six years of service, for failing a PFT and CFT , is inequitable. The Applicant received an Honorable characterization of service for his first enlistment from June 2005 to June 2009. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During the Applicant’s second enlistment, he met the requirements to be administratively processed for Unsatisfactory Performance. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Marine Corps. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant was properly separated in accordance with the guidance set forth in paragraph 6206 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual an d that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted. Relief denied.

5 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants an upgrade to Honorable. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) . 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 for additional information.

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 .


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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301108

    Original file (MD1301108.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 REDUCTION IN FORCE.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,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300299

    Original file (MD1300299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. During the Applicant’s four years of service he was found guilty at an NJP of violating UCMJ Article 86, received below-average Proficiency and Conduct marks of 4.1/3.9, and received 10 retention warnings for being UA, assignment to the BCP, failing the PFT and the CFT, lack of financial stability, poor judgment, and disloyal statements. ” Additional Reviews : After a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201245

    Original file (MD1201245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on her failure to pass the PFT twice during the same enlistment, her command processed her for administrative separation. Her command noted that there was no medical condition that prevented her from passing the PFT and concluded her failure was due to poor self-discipline.The Applicant’s officer-in-chargeand noncommissioned-officer-in-charge submitted letters requesting she be retained in the Marine Corps because of her performance and conduct outside of her physical fitness. ”...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301309

    Original file (MD1301309.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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100751

    Original file (MD1100751.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900919

    Original file (MD0900919.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Lost his education benefits. Per the Medical Officer, Marine Wing Communications Squadron 38 letter 6100 MO of 17 July 2007, the Applicant’s “present body composition status is not due to an underlying cause or associated disease.” The Applicant provided no documentation to counter the medical officer’s diagnosis or the Marine Corps body composition standards.Summary: After a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600068

    Original file (MD0600068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant advised to loss 16 pounds or 5 percent body fat and maintain for 6-month BCP assignment period.021029: First Endorsement to CO’s ltr of 29 Oct 02. I am recommending that he receive a General under honorable conditions discharge.This recommendation is based upon the respondent’s failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards set forth by the Body Composition Program (BCP) . According to the reference, a Marine assigned to the BCP on two separate occasions (e.g., first and second...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500755

    Original file (MD0500755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The basis for discharge is the Applicant's failure to meet standards for weight control and body fat composition. Commanding Officer's comments: "Based on Lance Corporal C_'s (Applicant's) failure to meet the Marine Corps Standards for weight control and body fat, it is requested that he be separated from the Marine Corps with a general discharge." The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101604

    Original file (MD1101604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined that relief due to post-service conduct was not warranted. ” 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0601026

    Original file (MD0601026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-PFC, USMCMD06-01026Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060731Narrative Reason for Separation: Character of Service:Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN PARA 6206.5Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: 2DAABN 2DMARDIV CAMLEJ NC 28542Applicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTEDCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: NONE Decision: Date of Decision:20070607 The Discharge shall : GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE...