DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
: TRG
Docket No: 10627-07
1 July 2008
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 June 2008. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The record shows that you enlisted in the Navy on 27 February
1970 and served continuously after that date. On1 March 1981
you were advanced to petty officer first class. You reenlisted
in the Navy on 22 March 1985 for four years.
During the period from 1 January 1981 to 30 November 1988 you
were evaluated on six occasions. All of the evaluations made
comments concerning your excessive weight. The sixth evaluation
for the period ending 30 November 1987 indicated you had 29% body
fat, which is considered to be obese.
Based on your inability to meet the weight standards, you were
processed for an administrative discharge which was approved by
the discharge authority. The final performance evaluation
indicated that your body fat percentage had increased to 31% and
you were not recommended for reenlistment.
You were honorably discharged on 16 September 1988 by reason of
other physical/mental conditions-obesity. At that time, you were
credited with 17 years, 11 months and 24 days of active service.
It was clear to the Board that given your many years of
difficulties in meeting the weight standards that you were on
notice that you must meet the weight standards in order to
continue in the Navy. Since you did not meet the standards, the
Board concluded that you were properly discharged and a
correction to your record to show that you retired from the Navy
was not warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10920-07
When you were informed of the command's intent to deny your reenlistment you appealed that denial to the Navy Personnel Command. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. As denial of reenlistment requests are not considered administrative processing, the member would not have had the opportunity to elect an administrative board.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08635-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...
NAVY | DRB | 1997_Navy | ND97-01301
ND97-01301 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 970825, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. On 870312, the applicant was evaluated for his body fat and weight. On 890417, the applicant was evaluated for his body fat and weight.
NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00744
The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE /Other physical/mental conditions - obesity, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. He has a long standing history of non-compliance with Navy weight and appearance standards which is documented on his Enlisted Performance Evaluation. The character of the discharge shall change to Honorable based on the applicant’s service record.
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501508
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Code: RE-4.” 939521: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged this date by reason of other physical, mental conditions – obesity with a characterization of general under honorable conditions. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3620250, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL AT THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THE...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500058
In time subsequent months I returned to the reserve center on one occasion and asked about my discharge - Receiving no information, I requested a copy of my service record from the Navy Reserve Personnel Command in New Orleans. The record contains a voided entry that is administratively crossed-out, dated 19900307 stating that the Applicant was discharged with an honorable discharge. The following entry in the record dated 19900307 states that the Applicant was discharged with a general...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05567-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11234-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 5 February 1982 for six years. However, the next two evaluations...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600261
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I just would like to change my discharge to an honorable one. Thank you.” Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07638-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2010. On 24 July 2008, you were recommended for administrative separation due to weight control failure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.