Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02610-09
Original file (02610-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TAL
Docket No: 02610-0939
7 December 2009

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United
“States Code, section 1552,

-A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval

Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application. on 24 November 2009. 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 ali 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corp and began a period of active duty
on 20 November 1985 at age 18. On 30 July 1986, you were
evaluated and advised that your body fat of 24% exceeded weight
control standards and you were placed on a formal weight control
and exercise program. On 29 October 1986, you were counseled for
Failure to make progress while on the weight control program. On
13 February 1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for
insubordinate conduct. On 19 February 1987, you were counseled
again for failure to make progress while on the weight control
program. On 1 March 1987 and 14 duly 1987, you received NUP for
ineubordinate conduct. On 9 September 1987, you were counseled
again for failure to make progress while on the weight control
program. Additionally, with each counseling you were warned that
your failure to conform to the Marine Corps weight and appearance
standards could result in administrative discharge action. On 5
October 1987, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action. You waived your rights to consult counsel,
submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB). Your commanding officer forwarded your
case, stating, in part, that you failed to conform to weight
gtandards even after you were granted an extension during
February 1987, and failed to make satisfactory progress as
evidenced by your failure to achieve your weight goal. Your
commanding officer further stated, your retention would adversely
affect the morale, discipline and military effectiveness of the
organization. Subsequently, on 14 October 1987 you were
separated with a general discharge due to unsatisfactory
performance (failure to conform to weight standards) ..

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
narrative reason for separation given the fact you did not adhere
to your command’s remedial weight control program. In this
regard, the unsatisfactory performance narrative reason for
separation is authorized when a Marine is discharged due to
weight control failure and not recommended for retention.

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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00554 12

    Original file (00554 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. 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. On 24 August and 22 September 1987, you were counseled with regard to losing weight, and warned that failure to adhere to the program could result in...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01297

    Original file (MD03-01297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Discharge warning issued.990331: Counseled concerning deficiency, specifically, failure to make progress while assigned to Weight control program, advised of assistance available and corrective actions. Discharge warning issued.990530: Counseled concerning deficiency, specifically, failure to make progress while assigned to Weight control program, advised of assistance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501570

    Original file (MD0501570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (“I [Applicant] further understand that I have been recommended for Administrative discharge due to failing the Marine Corps weight control program two times and being assigned for the third time.”) Applicant chooses not to make a statement.970312: Commanding Officer, Marine Air Control Squadron 2, notifies Applicant that he is assigned to the squadron Physical Training Platoon as a result of not being within Marine Corps height and weight standards. Weight: 237. Not due to pathological...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01097

    Original file (MD04-01097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 950721: GCMCA [CG, 2MAW] advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the Applicant's discharge was directed with a under honorable conditions (general) by reason unsatisfactory performance due to unsatisfactory performance of duties. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19950801 under honorable conditions (general) due to unsatisfactory performance due to weight control...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700259

    Original file (MD0700259.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant DID NOT CONFORM TO Marine Corps weight standards. The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred six discharge warnings and a failure to conform to Marine Corps weight and appearance standards. NOT FOUND IN RECORD Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s)...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600068

    Original file (MD0600068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant advised to loss 16 pounds or 5 percent body fat and maintain for 6-month BCP assignment period.021029: First Endorsement to CO’s ltr of 29 Oct 02. I am recommending that he receive a General under honorable conditions discharge.This recommendation is based upon the respondent’s failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards set forth by the Body Composition Program (BCP) . According to the reference, a Marine assigned to the BCP on two separate occasions (e.g., first and second...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01179

    Original file (MD02-01179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Handwritten statement from Applicant, dated June 26, 2002 Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as claimant's representative, dated July 1, 2002 (3 copies) Applicant's DD Form 214 (2 copies) Eighty pages from Applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501041

    Original file (MD0501041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. rd time on weight control. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil ” .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:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0500756

    Original file (MD0500756.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Request a medical evaluation be conducted to determine the Applicant’s medical status for BCP and Remedial Physical Conditioning Program (RPCP) participation. [Your unsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps Body Composition Program. Therefore, the narrative reason for separation, as stated on the DD214, is incorrect and should be changed from weight control failure to unsatisfactory performance.On 20021105 the Applicant was assigned to Marine Corps Body Composition...