Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01227
Original file (MD99-01227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD99-01227

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990920, 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 000720. 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 wife and I were very upset and depressed. I knew that I wasn't going to see my family for an entire year. The first few months were the most difficult. I had difficulty adjusting. I started to gain a few pounds. I left Okinawa weighing 182. My next and final duty station was Camp Pendleton, Ca. That is where things got worse. My wife and I were not getting along very well. I was also gaining more weight. About the last year of my tour my wife left me. I was a total mess. I was weighing in about 192 and my life was a total mess. I tried several diets to lose the weight, but nothing would work. I was told by my drill instructor in boot camp that it's great I lost all that weight, but unfortunately most marines gain it all back. That I did. I had trouble keeping up with the company pt sessions. Approximately 04/98 1 receive notification that I was being discharged from the Marine Corps. To tell the truth, at that point I was so depressed I didn't care anymore. Finally on 05/15/98 1 was discharged from the Marine Corps.

I believe that my discharge was unfair because I didn't commit a crime. I have never had an njp. Or office hours. The only Page eleven entries were because of my weight. I was the best marine I could be. I am now working for a sign supply company. I am doing fairly well in it. I am also going to the Community College of Southern Nevada. I wish to continue my education and receive my degree in criminal justice. My main reason for this request of an upgrade is for educational benefits. My GI bill. Thank you for your time reviewing my case. Sincerely

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: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                940923 - 941213  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 941213               Date of Discharge: 980515

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 05 03
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.3 (7)                       Conduct: 4.2 (7) (No discharge marks)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, GCM, MUC

 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 :

970609:  Applicant placed on weight control/distribution program.

970609:  Medical officer determined physical appearance is not due to a pathological disorder.

970818:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, failure to maintain Marine Corps physical standards by failing to pass the PFT on 970711. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

971124:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, conduct unbecoming a Marine by failing to pass the PFT on Sept 5 with a score of 119. SNM has also failed to maintain proper height and weight standards. SNM has made zero progress. SNM’s work performance has been poor at best. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

971215:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, adverse weight condition has reappeared. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

971217:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, failed to make satisfactory progress in accordance with MCO 6100.10b. Additionally, applicant has failed to pass a Semiannual Physical Fitness Test. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980128:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, adverse weight condition has continued. Given a 90 day period to conform. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980206:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, failed to make satisfactory progress in accordance with MCO 6100.10b. Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980416:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of failure to meet height/weight standards.

980415:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

980416:  Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) due to weight control failure. The factual basis for the recommendation was failure to conform to Marine Corps height/weight standards.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980515 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 proper but not equitable (C and D).

The Board determined that the discharge was not based on the type warranted by service record. The applicant had no NJP’s and his average proficiency and conduct marks were 4.3/4.2 respectively, thus warranting an honorable discharge. 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

  • 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 | 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 | MD03-00181

    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 | 2005_Marine | MD0501565

    Original file (MD0501565.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I had several Page 11 Entry’s for The Weight Control program and I had one NJP in my 3years and 6 months Active duty. Plan: Cleared for weight control program and recommended for COMRATS to facilitate Applicant’s weight loss. 031212: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Concerning Marine’s failure to meet Marine Corps Order P6100.12 Height/Weight Standards and being assigned (first assignment) to the Squadron’s Weight Control Program effective this date 22...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00664

    Original file (MD04-00664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970929 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance 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...

  • 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 | 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...

  • 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600323

    Original file (MD0600323.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. ” APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or from an attached document/letter to the Board: “ I Respectfully Request that my Discharge of general under honorable be changed to an Honorable. If thyroid studies normal, would concur with...