Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06344-01
Original file (06344-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X

2 NAVY ANNE

S

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No:  
19 February 2002

6344-01

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:

Secretary of the Navy

Subj:

Ref:

(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

Encl:

(1) DD Form 149 with attachments
(2) Case summary
(3) Subject's naval record

Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
1.
former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1)
with this Board requesting that the characterization of his
discharge be changed.

The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and

2.
Adams, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 12 February 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record.
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.

Documentary material considered by

The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining

3.
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as
follows:

a.

Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all

administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.

Although it appears that enclosure (1) was not filed in a

timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the
statute of limitations and review the application on its merits.

C .

Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 18 June 1981 at

the age of 18.

d.

During the period from 24 March 1982 to 11 May 1983,

Petitioner was assigned to a weight control/personal appearance
program on four occasions.
failed to satisfactorily complete the program due to being
overweight.

On three of these occasions, he

.

Petitioner served for nearly two years without

However, on 14 June 1983 he received

disEip1inar-y  incident.
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect, urinating in a
passageway, and urinating on personal property.
imposed was a reduction to  
pay, restriction for 15 days, and extra duty for five days.
On 4 January 1984 Petitioner was again assigned to a

paygrade E-2, a $500 forfeiture of

f.

The punishment

weight control/personal appearance program.
medical examination, he was diagnosed as overweight and his
condition was found not to be due to a pathological disorder.

However, following a

Q-

Subsequently, Petitioner was processed for separation by
reason of unsatisfactory performance as evidenced by his failure
to conform to weight standards and unsatisfactory completion of
three weight control programs.

h.

On 17 September 1984 Petitioner was issued a general

discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory
performance due to failure to conform to weight standards. At
the time of his discharge Petitioner's conduct and proficiency
averages of 4.0 and 3.9 were sufficiently high to authorize a
fully honorable characterization of service.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.

The Board notes the nature of Petitioner's misconduct and does
not condone his infractions.
However, the Board's finding is
based on Petitioner's overall satisfactory record of service as
evidenced by his conduct and proficiency average.

The Board is aware that attaining such averages does not entitle
an individual to an honorable characterization of service when
processed for administrative separation for cause
Board can discern no reason to depart from the mark averages in
this case, given Petitioner's satisfactory performance and his
disciplinary record of only one NJP in over three years of
service.
form of recharacterization of Petitioner's discharge is
appropriate.

Accordingly, the Board concludes that relief in the

However, the

In view of the foregoing,
injustice warranting the following corrective action.

the Board finds the existence of an

RECOMMENDATION:

a.

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
he was honorably discharged on 17 September 1984 vice issued the
general discharge under honorable conditions on the same day.

b.

That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating

to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed, or
completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such
entries or material be added to the record in the future.

C .

That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's

naval record be returned to the Board,
this Report of Proceedings,
maintained for such purpose,
part of Petitioner's naval record.
4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
review and deliberations,
and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.

for retention in a confidential file
with no cross reference being made a

together with a copy of

ROBERT 
Recorder

D. ZSALMAN

Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
authority of reference (a),
has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

%&&+Q.+
?-W. DEAN PFEIFFER

Executive Director

I

‘,

,



Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00661

    Original file (MD01-00661.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 920714 under honorable conditions (general) due to weight control failure (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper but not equitable (C and D).The Board found the applicant’s discharge was based solely on his failure to meet height/weight standards, and that his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05249-08

    Original file (05249-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TUR Docket No: 5249-08 11 February 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD ORM Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that the characterization of her discharge be changed. Based on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06260-99

    Original file (06260-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments _ (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the United States Marine Corps filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting a better characterization of service than the general discharge issued on 26 May 1983. considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. was being...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11221-06

    Original file (11221-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The reenlistment code was properly assigned and was based on his overall service record.A review of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning failure to be at his appointed place of duty; drunk driving; underage drinking; breaking restrictions; disobedience of orders; not being recommended for promotion; failure to comply with current Marine Corps weight standards; and3poor performance while assigned to the Battalion weight control program. The service record entry dated...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00427

    Original file (MD99-00427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00427 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990202, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I was overweight when I was enlisted in to the marines and because I gained the weight over the course of a few years I was released with a General Under Honorable Conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500882

    Original file (MD0500882.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00882 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050419. • I was also awarded the Marine Corp Good Conduct Medal on 3 Jun 89 (while I was on the weight control program) – just one year before my separation. However, I feel the characterization of my service for separation purposes was based solely on the Pro/Con marks (3.3/2.9) I received immediately following the above referenced NJP proceedings – without regard to the nature of my previous service for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00313

    Original file (MD01-00313.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Unsatisfactory Performance-Failure to conform to weight standards (administrative discharge board not required), authority: MARCORSEPMAN, Para 6206.1. Assistance/sources provided, but discharge warning issued.900214: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 920320 under honorable conditions (general) due to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00639

    Original file (MD03-00639.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Assigned to Battalion Weight Control Program with an initial weight of 225 lbs. Body fat is 25.9%.940328: Applicant granted a 3 month extension of the Battalion Weight Control Program.940621: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was not proper or equitable (C and D).The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01685-10

    Original file (01685-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies which were available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. CONCLUSION: Upon reviq@w and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting upgrading Petitioner's general discharge to an honorable characterization of service. The Board particularly notes that he had no disciplinary action and his proficiency and conduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00778

    Original file (MD03-00778.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Discharge warning issued.961017: Counseled concerning deficiency, specifically, failure to make progress while assigned to Weight control program, advised of assistance available and corrective actions. 971022: Weight is 257 lbs, 30% body fat.980107: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for an honorable discharge by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties.