| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Gale J. Thomas | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Member | |
| Mr. Robert L. Duecaster | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected by changing the reason and authority for his separation.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 4, but feels he should have been discharged for being overweight and allowed to receive separation pay. In support of his request he submits copies of documents showing he exceeded the body fat standards, counseling statements, suspension of favorable personnel actions, his failure to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test, his placement in the Army Weight Control Program, and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 February 1996, for a period of 4 years.
The applicant was released from active duty on 24 March 2002, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, for completion of required active service. His DD Form 214 indicates he had 6 years, 1 month and 10 days of active service, and was assigned the separation code “MBK” and the reentry code of “1.”
There is no documentation in the applicant’s available records concerning his being overweight. However, documents provided by the applicant show that on 30 November 2001, he exceeded the height and weight standards by 33 pounds, and exceeded the body fat standards by 2.58 percent. He was flagged (suspension of favorable personnel actions) and placed in the Army Weight Control Program. Statements indicate the applicant was scheduled for nutrition and exercise classes on 8, 15, and 22 January 2002. There is no other information concerning his progress or the final outcome of the applicant’s weight problem.
A DA Form 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG)) shows the applicant’s weight control flag was removed on 24 January 2002, because of his pending separation.
Army Regulation 600-9 establishes the Army’s Weight Control Program. It states that enrollment in a Weight Control Program starts on the day the soldier is informed by his unit commander that he has been entered in a weight control program. After a period of dieting and/or exercise for 6 months, soldiers who have not made satisfactory progress and who still exceed the screening table and body fat standard will be evaluated by health care personnel to determine if there is a medical reason for lack of weight loss. If no underlying or associated disease process is found to cause the overweight condition, the individual will be subject to separation from the service. Soldiers separated for failure to maintain body weight composition are entitled to half separation pay.
Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve. Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribed basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.
RE-1 applies to persons who were fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the time of separation.
Army Regulation 635-5-1 states that SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations, which identify reasons for, and types of separation from active duty. The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation. They are intended exclusively for the internal use of DOD and the military services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data. It notes that “MBK” is the appropriate SPD code for individuals separated for completion of required active service.
A “cross-reference” chart, provided by officials from the separations branch at the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command, confirms that “RE-1” is the appropriate reentry code for individuals who receive the SPD code of MBK.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant was released from active duty and assigned the appropriate reentry and separation codes that relate to the reason for his separation, “completion of required active service.”
2. The Board notes that the applicant was assigned the reentry code RE-1, which indicates he was qualified for continuous service at the time of his separation.
3. Documents presented by the applicant indicate he was placed in a weight control program on 30 November 2001, however at the time of his separation
(24 March 2002) he had not been in the program for 6 months, the allotted time for an evaluation and determination of his progress, and possible separation. Therefore, he could not have been separated as a weight control failure, and as such is not entitled to any separation pay.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__SAC __ __MDM _ ___RLD _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002079600 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030508 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022241
The applicant states that he was enrolled in the Army Weight Control Program (AWCP) and met his weight standard on 4 August 2005 in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 600-9 (AWCP). The applicant provides copies of a DA Form 5500-R (Body Fat Content Worksheet - Male), DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), and DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010367C070208
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 | CY2002 | 2002078668C070215
A fifth measurement was taken by the unit weight control NCO on 28 February 2001, which had resulted in a determination that the applicant met the body fat standard. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was denied attendance at the ANCOC based on his being under a FLAG action, as a result of his being in an overweight status on 4 January 2001, the scheduled date of his ANCOC class. Also, on 28 February 2001, when the unit weight control NCO determined he met the weight...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003999
On 23 July 1990, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 5 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of failure to meet the Army weight/body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9. Paragraph 5-15, in effect at the time, provided the policy for separating members who failed to meet the Army body composition/weight control standards if this condition was the only reason for separation and there...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012408
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The sergeant major informed the applicant that he would not be allowed to attend ANCOC due to his failure to meet the standards of AR 600-9 and would subsequently be demoted to the grade of E-6 based upon his conditional promotion. The applicant did not provide evidence to show, and his records do not indicate that his medical condition required processing through a Medical Evaluation Board (MEBD).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024780
On 11 March 1991, after having determined the applicant failed to achieve the established goals or comply with weight standards, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 5 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of failure to meet the Army weight/body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9. The evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a unit weigh-in and he exceeded both the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019419
(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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080679C070215
In February 2002, the applicant submitted a request asking that he be reinstated on the promotion list and that he be scheduled to attend the ANCOC. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the effective date and date of rank of his promotion to SFC/E-7 should be restored to 8 January 2000, because the revocation of this promotion was based on an unverified and flawed body fat measurement that resulted in his unjustly being denied enrollment in the ANCOC, and it finds this claim has...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100279C070208
In the Line of Duty memorandum to the Physical Disability Board, the CO went on to explain that the applicant was flagged due to failure to meet height and weight standards in accordance with Army Regulation 600-9 and that since his arrival at that unit, he had gained 33 pounds and his body fat increased from 22.43 percent to 28.58 percent. During the counseling session, the applicant was informed that if his conduct continued, action may be initiated to separate him from the Army under the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004432
On 15 December 1999, he received counseling for exceeding the Army body fat standards prescribed in Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program). He was notified he would be evaluated by medical personnel to determine if an underlying medical condition was causing him to exceed the allowable body fat percentage and that if no medical reason were found, he would be flagged until he met body fat standards. On 6 April 2000, his commander informed him he was initiating action to...