ex-, USMC 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20110720
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)	20060804 - 20060917  	Active:	

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20060918	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years  13 Months
Date of Discharge:  20101027	Highest Rank:  
Length of Service:    Year(s)    Month(s)  10  Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  51
MOS:  6046
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):   () /  ()	Fitness Reports:  

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle    (4)  

Periods of CONF:  

NJP:  

- 20091104:	Article  (Absence without leave), 9 specifications
	Specification 1: Failed to be on time for 0530 BCP PT on 20090319
	Specification 2: Failed to be on time for 0530 BCP PT on 20090408
	Specification 3: Failed to be on time for 0530 BCP PT on 20090409
	Specification 4: Failed to be on time for 0530 BCP PT on 20090423
	Specification 5: Failed to gym for 0500 BCP PT on 20090804
	Specification 6: Failure to be at appointed place of duty 0645-0840, 20091002
	Specification 7: Failure to be at appointed place of duty 0701-0805, 20091006
	Specification 8: Failed to return or notify Power Plants after his Sponsorship training which ended at 1030 and did remain so absent until 1625
	Specification 9: Absent from appointed place of duty 0630-0702 - Uniform inspection
	Article  (Failure to obey order or regulation), 2 specifications
	Specification 1: To fill in for his SNCO at the 0700 Power Plants Production Control Maintenance meeting
	Specification 2: To be at barracks for 0630 uniform inspection
	Awarded:     Suspended:    

SCM:  	SPCM:  	CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

- 20090218:	For your assignment to the Marine Corps Body Composition Program (BCP).  Specifically, you failed to properly maintain your body composition standards.  During the body composition evaluation conducted 20090122 you were found to weigh 236 pounds with 27 percent body fat.  Per the reference, the maximum weight based on your height of 72 inches is 202 pounds.  You are advised that this 1st assignment to BCP is for a 6 month period.

- 20090731:	For your unsatisfactory assignment to the Marine Corps BCP.  Due to insufficient effort, you have not met your weight/body composition reduction goals.  Your weight as of 20090703 is 237 pounds.  Your assignment to weight control began 20090122, you have gained 1 pound and lost 6% body fat.

- 20090818:	For your assignment to the Marine Corps BCP.  Specifically, you failed to properly maintain your body composition standards.  On 20090818 you were found to weigh 235 pounds with 19 percent body fat.  Per the reference the maximum weight based on you height of 72 inches is 202 pounds.  You are advised that this is 2nd assignment to BCP is for a period of time in which you are to achieve and maintain your appropriate weight and body fat percentage.

- 20091103:	For misconduct.  NJP held 20091103 for violation of Article 86 x 9.  Specifically, SNM, without authority, absented himself from his appointed place of duty on several accounts between March 2009 and October 2009.  SNM was also in violation of Article 92 X2.  Specifically, SNM failed to obey direct orders from his SNCO, which were to fill in for his SNCO, at the 0700 Power Plants Production Control Maintenance meeting on 20091006 and to be at barracks for 0630 uniform inspection on 20091014.  This type of behavior will not be tolerated and does not meet the professional standards of conduct expected of a United States Marine.

- 20091230:	For your unsatisfactory assignment to the Marine Corps BCP.  Due to insufficient effort, you have not met your weight/body composition reduction goals.  Your weight as of 20091221 is 246 pounds.  Your second assignment to weight control began 20090819, you have gained 11 pounds and gained 6% body fat.

- 20100115:	For your failure of the CFT for 2009.  Specifically, you must successfully complete the maneuver under fire portion of the CFT event in under 3:58 for your age group.  You completed the event in 5:03.

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:		Other Documentation:	
		Additional Statements:
	From Applicant:		From/To Representation:		From/To Congress member:	

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Paragraph 6215, WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, 
(MCO P1900.16E), 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 contends his weight control failure was an aberration in his otherwise honorable period of service.  

Decision

Date:  20120913		Location: Washington D.C.	 Representation: 

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 warnings and   for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, 9 specifications) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications).  Based on his failure to conform to weight standards, the command administratively processed  for separation.  When notified of administrative separation processing using the  procedure, the Applicant exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement.  The Applicant did submit four letters of recommendation from fellow Marines attesting to the positive example and mentorship the Applicant had on his Marines.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends his weight control failure was an aberration in his otherwise honorable period of service.  Applicable regulations state that 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.  The Applicant had one NJP and six 6105 counseling warnings during his enlistment.  Additionally, his Proficiency and Conduct averages were 4.0/4.0, respectively over nine occasions, indicating below average service.  The NDRB determined that the General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service was warranted, and the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances.  Also, the Applicant’s record reflects the following comments from the Commanding Officer of Marine Aircraft Group 36, “The Applicant was the subject of a Competency Review Board in which the board determined he lacked leadership, judgment, bearing, physical fitness, endurance, and self discipline.  As a result he was reduced to the rank of Lance Corporal on 1 July 2010 based on professional incompetence.  The Applicant has not shown reasonable progress and has no potential for future military service.”  The Applicant’s Body Composition Program lasted for over one year.  The NDRB determined that an upgrade was not 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 for additional information.

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 Disabled 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