Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00608
Original file (MD99-00608.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

ex-LCPL, USMC
Docket No. MD99-00608

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990329, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000207. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned an impropriety in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall change. The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, MARCORSEPMAN para 6215.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 26, SEPARATION CODE should read: “HCR1” vice “JHJ4”. The original DD Form 214 should be reissued.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.



Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
 Ltr from applicant     

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                950412 - 950702  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950703               Date of Discharge: 980503

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 10 01
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 33

 Highest Rank: LCPL

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.4 (5)              Conduct: 4.3 (5)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6215.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

980210:  Counseled re: not being recommended for promotion to CPL because of failure to meet height and weight standards.

980224:  Counseled re: not being recommended for promotion to CPL because of failure to meet height and weight standards.

980227:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards. Notified that he is being recommended for administrative separation for weight control failure. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided.

980312:  Counseled re: not being recommended for promotion to CPL because of failure to meet height and weight standards.

980403:  GCMCA [CG, I MEF] directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of weight control failure.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980503 general under honorable conditions due to weight control failure (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). 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 and shall change to Honorable/Weight Control Failure. (C and D).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. The Board determined that the command did not follow correct military procedures when processing the applicant for discharge. The command failed to counsel the applicant as required by MCO. The only counseling the applicant received was at the time he was notified that he was being processed for administrative separation for weight control failure.

The applicant’s average proficiency and conduct marks were 4.4/4.3 respectively. Relief granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 6215, WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E, effective 18 Aug 95 until Present.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT
If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:
                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon St SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00695

    Original file (MD01-00695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00695 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010420, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Recommended loss of 5 pounds per month and a total of 30 pounds within 180 days.990615: Counseling: Applicant assigned to the Weight Control Program to correct deficiency of not meeting height/weight standards. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01227

    Original file (MD99-01227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I was also gaining more weight. The applicant had no NJP’s and his average proficiency and conduct marks were 4.3/4.2 respectively, thus warranting an honorable discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00445

    Original file (MD01-00445.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00445 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. The record shows that according to Marine Corps standards, the applicant was over weight at enlistment (received a weight waiver for being 136 pounds) and she did not make sufficient progress towards correcting her weight problem during her 2 years and 11 months of service to the Corps. The Board determined this is a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00597

    Original file (MD04-00597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant ’s second assignment.020515: Counseled concerning deficiency, specifically, unsatisfactory performance while assigned to the Marine Corps weight control program as evidenced by continued weight gain and only minimal weight loss, failure to adhere to my diet and weight loss plan, advise of assistance available and corrective actions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00619

    Original file (MD00-00619.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records are reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 970106: Retention warning issued and counseled that failure to maintain personal appearance and weight standards would result in administrative discharge action.970715: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 981010: GCMCA [CO, MACG 38] directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00524

    Original file (MD99-00524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    941011: Counseled concerning deficiency (unsatisfactory progress while assigned to weight control program; overall poor attitude and lack of motivation/willingness to lose weight), advise of assistance available and corrective actions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 950915 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. After a thorough review of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00524 (1)

    Original file (MD99-00524 (1).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    941011: Counseled concerning deficiency (unsatisfactory progress while assigned to weight control program; overall poor attitude and lack of motivation/willingness to lose weight), advise of assistance available and corrective actions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 950915 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. After a thorough review of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01053

    Original file (MD99-01053.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thank you for your time in reviewing my case. 980603: GCMCA, CG, MCAB, Eastern, directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of weight control failure. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was not equitable (C and D).The Board found that the discharge was not based on type warranted by service record.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00624

    Original file (MD99-00624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    971121: Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) due to weight control failure. The Board determined that the discharge was not based on the record of service. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support Directorate Armed Forces Reading Room Washington, D.C. 20310-1809The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00853

    Original file (MD03-00853.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 960605: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to failing to make a reasonable effort to conform to Marine Corps height and weight standards. 960618: SJA determined the case was sufficient in law and fact.960618: GCMCA [CG, MCRD/ERR, PISC] advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the...