DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SoN
Docket No: 06452-10
14 April 2011
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Tor Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD oe
Ref : (a) 10 U.6.€. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) Subject's naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1)
with this Board requesting recharacterization of his general
discharge from active duty.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Blanchard, Mr. Sproul, and
Mr. Genteman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 12 April 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
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 enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner,
it is in the interest of justice to waive the statue of
limitations and review the application on its merits.
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a
period of active duty on 25 April 1978. The Board found that he
served without incident until on 15 August 1979, when he was
assigned to a weight control program. At that time, a medical
evaluation stated that he had no pathological reason for his
condition, had been counseled numerous times on his
unsatisfactory performance, and was 15 pounds overweight, a gain
of eight pounds since starting the program. On 26 February 1980,
it was determined that he had not complied with the weight
control program and was recommended for separation from the
Marine Corps. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was
initiated by reason of unsuitability due to obesity/apathy. He
waived his rights to consult counsel or submit a statement. On
19 March 1980, his commanding officer (CO) forwarded his case to
the separation authority stating, in part, that he had shown no
improvement or desire to improve while in the weight control
program, and had in fact gained weight. His CO felt that his
weight gain was due to apathy and not to any medical problems.
The discharge authority concurred and directed a general
discharge by reason of unsuitability. On 2 April 1980, he was so
discharged.
d. Characterization of service is based on individual conduct
mark averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis.
His overall conduct mark average was 4.2. At the time of his
service, an average of 4.0 was required for a fully honorable
characterization of service.
e. In his application, Petitioner states that he was given a
general discharge because he was obese.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
In this regard, the Board notes Petitioner's overall record of
military service, including the absence of any disciplinary
action and overall satisfactory performance. However, the Board
notes that the discharge authority should have based the
characterization of service on his overall conduct markd average,
which is high enough for a characterization of honorable.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
on 2 April 1980, Petitioner was honorably discharged from active
duty, vice under honorable conditions, now of record.
b. That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in
Petitioner’s naval record.
c. That upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be
informed that Petitioner’s application was received on 14 June
2010,
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 723.6(c) 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.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN or
Recorder 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.
W. DEAN PFEIF!
Executive Diré
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06860-00
show that you were on the weight control program during the period 1 August 1976 through 31 July 1977. for the period ending 31 July states as follows: The next two fitness reports The fitness report (He) was placed on weight/personal appearance at-a starting weight of 210 pounds with a goal of to be achieved by 771027. years, 7 months and 21 days of active service. He continued to gain weight through While undergoing the physical This On 31 August 1980 the discharge directed on 20 April...
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 | BCNR | CY2006 | 11221-06
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08280-95
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No: 8280-95 8 May 2000 Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy FORMER REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (4 0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) U.S.C. Many patients lost weight initially, lo-15 pounds but began to gain weight after 6 to 12 months of use, and commonly gained per year In his opinion, weight control was very difficult for those patients, and that “...it would take...
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00237
The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Nevertheless I never received the response until the day my punishment was completed, and the appeal had been singed and dated 3 days after my appeal was submitted. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02078
His maximum weight by Air Force standards was 189 pounds. They indicated that the applicant received a physical examination on 16 July 1981 in conjunction with his involuntary discharge action for failing to meet Air Force Weight Control Program (WCP) standards. Further, we find no evidence in his records that his knee condition prevented him from meeting standards for Air Force weight management.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4988 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 TAL Docket No: 4988-14 8 July 2015 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Qe UsMc, ELD Ref: (a) LO U.8sG. 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 general characterization of his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059774C070421
Effective 8 September 1982 the applicant was separated in the pay grade of E-6 under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200 for unsuitability. The applicant’s available records also show that he enlisted in the ARNG after his separation from active duty. There is no evidence of record, and none submitted by the applicant, that his medical treatment on active duty was inadequate.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06260-99
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...
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00668
I had a problem with weight control, and was discharged because of it.To begin with, I had a weight problem when I went into the Marine Corps, and had to go on a delayed enlistment program to give me time to loose some weight. I request that you look into this situation and assist in getting the discharge upgraded, so that I may receive my VA Education Assistance benefit.your assistance Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the...