Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00695
Original file (MD01-00695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. 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. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant designated a member of congress as his representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that members of congress or their employees do not normally represent applicants and must obtain written authorization from the congressman or elect another representative. Subsequent to the application and the acknowledgement letter, the applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011018. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: (GENERAL) UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues

 1. The undersigned lost 35 lbs to get into the Marine Corps. I needed a waiver to enlist due to the dieting & exercising the Marine Corps physical found nitrates in my system. During my enlistment I steadily re-gained the weight I had lost & was physically unable to keep my weight down..
2. (Equity Issue) This former member requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.

 Documentation
Only the service and medical records were reviewed as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                970417 - 970427  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970428               Date of Discharge: 000218

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 02 09 20
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 55
Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency: 4.3 (6)              Conduct: 4.4 (6)

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6206.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

961214:  Entrance physical exam: HT - 66½ inches, WT - 193 pounds, Build - medium. Re-measured on 970428 with WT of 189 pounds.
970426:  Waiver of established physical standard due to history of proteinuria granted for enlistment.

 990527:  Credentialed Health Care Provider, Branch Clinic Naval Hospital Camp Lejeune: HT - 67 inches, WT - 205 pounds, Body Fat 20%. Not within weight standards. 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. Applicant directed to meet reduction goals of 5 pounds per month or 0.3% body fat per month and weight goal is 175 pounds or 18% body fat.

990616:  Measured - 205 pounds.
990616:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility not recommended for promotion to Cpl for Jul 99 promotion because of weight control.
9900804:         Measured - 215 pounds.

 990817:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility not recommended for promotion to Cpl for Sep 99 promotion because of weight control.

990818:  Measured - 219 pounds.

990921:  Measured - 221 pounds.

990921:  Counseled concerning deficiency, specifically, failure to conform to and maintain minimum established weight and body fat standards for height from 990615 - 990901. Advised of assistance available and corrective actions. Discharge warning issued.

991015:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility not recommended for promotion to Cpl for Oct 99 promotion because of weight control.

991101:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility not recommended for promotion to Cpl for Nov 99 promotion because of weight control.

991215:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: on or about 991027, absent himself from his appointed place of duty, to wit: Brig company Remedial Physical Training.
         Award: Forfeiture of $275 pay per month for 1 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 14 days. Not appealed.

991203:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility not recommended for promotion to Cpl for Dec 99 promotion because of weight control.

991215:  Measured - 216 pounds.

991215:  Credentialed Health Care Provider, Branch Clinic, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune: Pt reexamined and found to be overweight. Not due to a pathological disorder.

000113:  Measured - 226 pounds.

 000113:  Applicant acknowledged eligibility not recommended for promotion to Cpl for Jan 00 promotion because of weight control.
000207:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance of duties. The basis for discharge is your failure to make a reasonable effort to conform to Marine Corps height and weight standards by adhering to a regimen prescribed by your commanding officer and health care provider.

000207:  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.
000209:  CO, Hdqtrs & Supp Bn, Camp Lejeune directed the discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 000218 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance due to failure to adhere to weight standards. (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 and equitable (C and D).
Issue 1. The Board acknowledged the applicant’s history of being overweight. However, the Board also considered the applicant’s service record during the time he was assigned to the weight control program. The applicant gained eleven pounds during the six months he was assigned to weight control. His PFT score dropped from 220 in 1998 to 186 in 1999. He received one NJP for missing remedial physical training. These actions support the command’s assertion that the applicant did not make a reasonable effort to conform to Marine Corps height and weight standards, and warrant discharge under honorable conditions (general). Relief denied.

Issue 2. The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Paragraph 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug 95 to Present, states that a Marine may be separated if the Marine is unqualified for further service by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ afls10.jag.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:

                   Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00017

    Original file (MD03-00017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00017 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 990924: Credentialed Health Care Provider, NavHosp, Camp Lejeune, medical eval: Current HT – 70 inches, WT – 231 pounds, Body Fat – 27%. Advised of being overweight and in excess of allowable body fat standard.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00546

    Original file (MD01-00546.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I received a General Under Honorable Conditions just based on my weight problem. 990804: GCMCA [MCB Hawaii] advised the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the applicant's discharge was directed with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to weight control failure. Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A. Paragraph 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 18 Aug...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00125

    Original file (MD03-00125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00125 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021024, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The fact that the Applicant was in a limited duty status during much of his enlistment does not make his assignment to weight control and subsequent administrative separation for failure to maintain weight standards either improper or inequitable.

  • 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 | 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00469

    Original file (MD02-00469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00469 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020226, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant was a good marine, not withstanding the issue of weight control, this is a veteran that served in a combat zone. The basis for discharge is the failure to conform to Marine Corps height, weight, and body fat standards, as evidenced by the failure to attain and maintain the prescribed weight goal and/or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00237

    Original file (MD04-00237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • 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 | 2005_Marine | MD0500447

    Original file (MD0500447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: Applicant’s DD Form 214 Two pages from Applicant’s service record Character reference, dated November 15, 2004 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 940114 - 940619 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940620 Date of Discharge: 970725 Length of Service...

  • 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:...