Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610989C070209
Original file (9610989C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
2.  The applicant requests that her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to show her character of service as Honorable and the separation authority as Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 18.  

3.  Orders published by Headquarterss, 101st Airborne Division and Fort Campbell, Fort Campbell, Kentucky on 
14 March 1994 show that the applicant was transferred to a transition point for transition processing and release from active duty on 28 March 1994.  The authority for her separation is indicated as Army Regulation 635-200, 
chapter 18.

4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the authority for her separation as Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8, and her character of service as under honorable conditions.  She was separated on 28 March 1994 because of weight control failure.  She had 5 years and 6 days of active service.  

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the policies and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 8 of that regulation has nothing to do with weight control failure but pertains to separation because of pregnancy.  Paragraph 5-15, since superseded, concerns separation for failure to meet Army body composition/weight control standards.  That paragraph states, in effect, that the service of a soldier separated per that paragraph would be characterized as honorable.

6.  An interim change 2 to Army Regulation 635-200, effective 11 June 1993, superseded paragraph 5-15 and added a Chapter 18 to the regulation, which pertains to separation because of failure to meet body fat standards.  It states that the service of a soldier separated per Chapter 18 will be characterized as honorable.   

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was separated from the Army because of failure to meet body fat standards under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 18.  Her characterization of service was honorable.

2.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was released from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 18, and that the characterization of her service was honorable.              

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006204

    Original file (20140006204.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 December 2012, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him for failing to meet body fat standards or make satisfactory progress, in accordance with chapter 18 of AR 635-200 (Enlisted Administrative Separations). On 5 December 2012, the applicant’s immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant in accordance with AR 635-200, chapter 18, for weight control failure. A designation of "unfit for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010367C070208

    Original file (20040010367C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    This document did not indicate the applicant’s medical condition prevented her from meeting the weight loss goals required by the weight control program. The record does include a DD Form 214 that confirms the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 18, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of weight control failure, on 15 January 2003. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was enrolled in the weight control program and after failing to make satisfactory progress...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017368

    Original file (20140017368.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of the narrative reason for his separation from honorably discharged due to failure to meet body fat standards to a medical discharge. On 4 April 1988, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 5-15 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for failing to meet body fat standards and enrollment in the AWCP and failing to make satisfactory...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999027787

    Original file (1999027787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 990721. The Board noted the applicant’s contention that his discharge was inequitable because he was discharged for exceeding body fat standards even though there was sufficient medical evidence to support a medical review. AR Number: 1999027787 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 990728 A9321 Character of Service: HD A9445 Date of Discharge: 940721 A0100 Authority: AR 635-200 C18 Reason: A1300 Results of Board...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014414

    Original file (20140014414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Shortly after his medical examination, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 18 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) for failing to meet body fat standards and enrollment in the ABCP and failing to make satisfactory progress. The applicant provides: a. It states that Soldiers who fail to meet the body fat standards set forth in Army Regulation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510405C070209

    Original file (9510405C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical personnel at the time determined that his overweight condition was not the result of a medical condition and recommended that he be placed in a weight control program. Chapter 18 of that regulation states that soldiers who fail to meet the body fat standards set forth in Army Regulation 600-9 shall be separated when such condition is the sole basis for separation. Also, initiation of separation proceedings is required for soldiers who fail to meet screening table weight and body...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002375

    Original file (20140002375.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he was discharged for weight control failure under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 18, but he injured his left eye in January 2005. b. Paragraph 3-16e states vision that cannot be corrected with ordinary spectacle lenses to at least 20/40 in one eye and 20/100 in the other eye or 20/30 in one eye and 20/200 in the other eye, or 20/20 in one eye and 20/800 in the other eye are causes for referral to an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019186

    Original file (20110019186.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 January 2010, the applicant’s immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant in accordance with chapter 18 of Army Regulation 635-200 for failing to meet body fat standards, enrollment in the AWCP on 10 August 2009, and failing to make satisfactory progress. A body fat evaluation may also be done by unit personnel to assist in measuring progress. If health care personnel are unable to determine a medical reason for lack of weight loss—and if the individual is...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001959

    Original file (20090001959.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In January 1989, the applicant was determined to be within Army Weight standards and he was allowed to enlist in the USAR. It provides that Soldiers who fail to meet the body fat standards set forth in Army Regulation 600-9 shall be separated under this provision when it is the sole basis for separation. The available evidence does not show that the applicant was ever physically unable to perform his duty or that he should have been separated for physical disability.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019419

    Original file (20130019419.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    (10) On 13 October 2009, she was seen by medical personnel for follow-up for lumbar spine pain and for evaluation of her right knee. The evidence of record shows she was referred to an MEB after her separation processing had begun and after being seen by medical personnel for lumbar spine pain and evaluation of her right knee. The records do not show any evidence of error in her discharge processing.