Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00624
Original file (MD99-00624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PFC, USMC
Docket No. MD99-00624

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990405, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed Mr. Reeves County Veterans Service Officer as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000310. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned an inequity 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, authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6215.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. MY DISCHARGE WAS INEQUITABLE BECAUE I WASN’T ALLOWED ADEQUATE TIME FOR THE STRESS FRACTURES IN MY SHINS TO HEAL PROPERLY BEFORE BEING PUT ON WEIGHT CONTROL, THUS LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES I COULD DO, SUCH AS RUNNING TO HELP MAINTAIN MY WEIGHT. THEREFORE MY WEIGHT WOULD FLUCUATE RESULTING IN I NOT BEING GIVEN THE WHOLE SIX MONTHS TO MEET MY WEIGHT STANDARDS. I SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO FULLY RECOVER FROM MY STRESS FRACTURES, THEN PUT ON WEIGHT CONTROL.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                940610 - 950605  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950606               Date of Discharge: 971224

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 06 19
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 51

 Highest Rank: LCPL

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.1 (8)              Conduct: 4.0 (8)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Expert Badge (2d), NDSM, SSDR, LOA (2), Pistol Sharpshooter Badge

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 :

970317:  Medical evaluation from credential medical officer determines Marine is fit for participation in a physical exercise program, that his condition is not due to a pathological disorder, and that he recommends a 4 pound per month weight loss over a 6 month period.

970331:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

970502:  Not recommended for promotion to CPL for the month of May 1997 because of weight control.
970723:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

970730:  Credentialed medical officer determines applicant has stress fractures in both tibia’s. Put on 10 days light duty.

970814:  Light duty extended an additional 7 days.

970802:  Not recommended for promotion to CPL for the month of Aug 1997 because of weight control.

970813:  Administratively reduced due to failure to make satisfactory progress while assigned to weight control program.

970820:  Credentialed medical officer determines stress fractures unresolved, no running during PT.

970827:  Counseled concerning deficiencies, specifically you having received PRO/CON marks of 3.5/3.0 as a result of failure to make progress on weight control program.

970917:  Credentialed medical officer continues not running, light duty.

971001:  Not recommended for promotion to LCPL while on weight control.

971008:  Credentialed medical officer continues no running.

971112:  Credentialed medical officer determines applicant should continue with slow jog, no further appt’s required.

971121:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of a weight control failure.

971121:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

971121:  Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) due to weight control failure. The factual basis for the recommendation was the “respondent’s failure to successfully complete the weight control program”.
971215:  GCMCA [CG, 3 rd MarDiv] 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 971224 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 equitable (C and D). The Board determined that the discharge was not based on the record of service. The applicant’s average Pro and Con marks were 4.1/4.0 respectively, meeting the requirement necessary for an honorable discharge. The discharge shall change to honorable.


 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, DC 20374-5023       


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00879 (7)

    Original file (MD99-00879 (7).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter of Personal Recommendation from Sgt M___ P___ Copies from Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (2pgs) Copies of DD Form 214 (2) Copy of Discharge Package (8pgs) Letter from Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider of Sgt P____ Copy of Purpose of Scope of the Navy Discharge Review Board and the Board for Correction of Naval Records...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00879

    Original file (MD99-00879.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter of Personal Recommendation from Sgt M___ P___ Copies from Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (2pgs) Copies of DD Form 214 (2) Copy of Discharge Package (8pgs) Letter from Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider of Sgt P____ Copy of Purpose of Scope of the Navy Discharge Review Board and the Board for Correction of Naval Records...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00668

    Original file (MD00-00668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00233

    Original file (MD04-00233.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 030311: Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) due to weight control failure. The Applicant’s service was marred by a failure to comply with Marine Corps standards despite three assignments to weight control.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00181

    Original file (MD03-00181.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980428: Applicant’s weight: 270 pounds, Body Fat: 31%.980508: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties.980511: Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) due to weight control failure. The applicant does not deny that he failed to maintain Marine Corps height and weight standards in violation of MCO 6100.10 and he failed to make reasonable progress...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00989

    Original file (MD99-00989.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.950216: Weight evaluation: Weight 208 pounds. Specifically, the applicant had two instances of misconduct, counseling for negotiating worthless checks (in Aug 95) and CO’s NJP for using provoking words and conduct unbecoming a US Marine (in Mar 95). Regardless of any medical injury, the applicant was still required to keep within body fat standards.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00312

    Original file (MD01-00312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specifically, being placed on the weight control program per Commanding Officer letter dated 990726; overweight (current weight 178 lbs; max wt by MCO 6100.10B is 156 pounds. 000106: Commanding officer recommended Honorable discharge due to 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 proper but inequitable (C and D).The applicant provided letters from her...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00501

    Original file (MD03-00501.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00501 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030130. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After many months my command advised me that an administrative separation for failure to meet weight standards would be more likely to succeed and that the discharge rating would be the same, General under Honorable.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00605

    Original file (MD02-00605.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An honorable discharge is required to pursue this career and be a productive citizen.I thank you in advance for your consideration in this matter.Sincerely, Documentation In addition to the service record (there was no discharge package available), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214Copy of article from newspaper Medical records (9 pages)Record of proficiency and conduct markings dated 10/06/99 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE...