Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. MD99-00524

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

 ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD99-00524

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990302, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000110.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  (GENERAL) UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 12c, Net Active Service This Period, should read: "03  06  12" vice "03  06  11", Block 24, Character of Service, should read:  “(GENERAL) UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS” vice “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS”, and Block 28, Narrative Reason for Discharge, should read:  "UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE" vice "UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES".  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues; block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of DD Form 215 for DD Form 214 issued on 950915

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:    None
	Inactive:  USMCR(J)		910305 - 920303	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  920304		Date of Discharge:  950915

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  06  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  XX

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.28 (7)		Conduct:  3.94 (7)

Military Decorations: GCM

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, AFEM, SSDR, UNM, LOA, MUC

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

910305:	Entrance Exam (St. Louis MEPS):  Reported applicant's height as 69½ inches, weight as 213 pounds with a medium build.

930126:	Counseled concerning deficiency (being overweight).  Placed on weight control and remedial PT and advised to lose 1.5 pounds per month.  Weight goal is 186 pounds. Advise of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

930413:	Counseled concerning deficiency (possession of an unauthorized alcoholic beverage in barracks room), advise of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

930617:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the Jul 93 Prom Qtr because of failure to demonstrate technical and professional competency required of an NCO.

930823:	Counseled concerning deficiency (lackadaisical attitude towards responsibilities and duties as a Marine - specifically, repeated failure to discharge duties as mail orderly in the prescribed manner), advise of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

931001:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the Oct 93 Prom Qtr because of recent page 11 entry dated 930823.

931213:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the Jan 94 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

940227:	Credentialed Health Care Provider:  Applicant reexamined and found to be overweight not due to a pathological disorder.

940601:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the Jul 94 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

940804:	Counseled concerning deficiency (substandard performance in all aspects of being a Marine, specifically, failure to maintain prescribed Height/Weight standards, failure to pass recent PFT, failure to qualify with the Service Rifle, and your unwillingness to respond to numerous past counseling sessions), advise of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

940818:	Appeared before the Commanding Officer for Competency Review Proceedings and was administratively (Non-Punitive) reduced to grade of Private First Class due to Professional Incompetence.  

940826:	Assignment to weight control program with a weight reduction goal of 6 pounds per month with weight goal of 192 pounds.  Discharge warning issued.  

940929:	Counseled concerning unsatisfactory progress while on weight control.

941011:	Counseled concerning deficiency (unsatisfactory progress while assigned to weight control program; overall poor attitude and lack of motivation/willingness to lose weight), advise of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

941102:	Counseled concerning unsatisfactory progress while on weight control.

941114:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the Dec 94 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

941230:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	Jan 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950112:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	Feb 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950213:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	Mar 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950227:	Applicant reassigned to the weight control/remedial physical conditioning program to meet reduction goal of 6 pounds per month.  Current weight is 280 pounds and goal weight is 192 pounds, to be attained no later than 3 months from this date.  Discharge warning issued.

950228:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	Apr 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950419:	Counseled concerning deficiency (lack of sufficient progress on the weight control program since 26 Feb 95, failure to schedule an appointment in a timely manner for a re-evaluation medical board on my knee and poor performance in the S-1 shop), advise of assistance available and corrective actions.  Discharge warning issued.

950425:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	May 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950525:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	May 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950526:	Applicant counseled concerning unsatisfactory progress on weight control.

950530:	Credentialed Health Care Provider:  Applicant reexamined and found to be overweight not due to a pathological disorder.

950620:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	Jul 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950720:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the
	Aug 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950816:	Advised eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the Sep 95 Prom Qtr because of assignment to the Weight Control Program.

950526:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions), by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties.  The basis for discharge is specifically, failure to perform your duties in a competent manner and weight control failure. 

950607:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation and to include statement of rebuttal.

9508:	Applicant's statement:  "Since beginning active duty I have realized what a grave mistake I have made by joining the Marine Corps.  I didn't really believe that I was cut out for military life.  I don't feel that it's hard I just don't agree with some the of the policies and regulations that govern military personnel. I felt that once I joined I could adjust and understand but I feel it has gotten worse and I see no signs of improvement.  My attitude concerning the military is all around bad and I wouldn't recommend that anyone joins the Marine Corps unless they could contend with the favoritism or special treatment shown to certain individuals due to the way they act or because they have never been in trouble before, or because someone who is of a higher rank who doesn't know their own job can tell you yours.  If it was left up to me my time in the military would be time lost in the civilian life because the military isn't the real world.  If I have learned one thing from being in the military it would be that you get ahead by who you know and who you kiss up to not what you know and how well you do your job.

	    My dramatic weight gain and reluctance to lose weight is directly due to the way I feel about the Marine Corps and if I were to remain in the Marine Corps I don't think it will change.  I do believe that my attitude and conduct will get worse the longer I am on active duty.  Separation from the Marine corps is the best thing for me because I am not willing to change or adjust to something that I don't agree with." 

950619:	Commanding officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure.

950817:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

950823:	GCMCA [CG, 3D MAW] advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the applicant's discharge was directed with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason unsatisfactory performance due to lack of reasonable effort on weight control and weight control failure and the primary basis to appear on DD-214 is Unsatisfactory Performance of Duties.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 950915 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.  The Board believes that no relief is warranted in this case.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Paragraph 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 to Present, states that a Marine may be separated if the Marine is unqualified for further service by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT

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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon Street SE RM 309
		Washington, D.C.  20374-5023

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX:  A8400/A0100/A9500/A9217