Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00364
Original file (MD02-00364.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00364

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020130, 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 020912. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned an impropriety and 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 /Unsatisfactory Performance-Failure to conform to weight standards (administrative discharge board not required), authority: MARCORSEPMAN, Para 6206.1.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


 Issues, as submitted

1. Reason for being overweight was due to the fact that I was on light duty for apron 6-8 mos. Please take my medical records in consideration and review along with my service record. Without my discharge upgrade I'm not eligible to receive any benefits of my G.I. Bill.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                860924 - 870105  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 870106               Date of Discharge: 910129

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 04 00 24
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 70
Highest Rank: Cpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency: 4.3 (11)                      Conduct: 4.3 (11)

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Letter of Commendation, SSDR with 1 Star, GCM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Unsatisfactory Performance-Failure to conform to weight standards (administrative discharge board not required), authority: MARCORSEPMAN, Para 6206.1.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

870105:  Applicant's enlistment weight: 221 pounds.
880326:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the second quarter, month of March, due to lack of demonstrated leadership qualities.

880601:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of June due to lack of demonstrated leadership qualities.

880901:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the fourth quarter, month of September, due to lack of demonstrated leadership qualities.

881201:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the first quarter, month of December, due to lack of demonstrated leadership qualities.

890131:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of January because of substandard performance.

890203:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of February because of substandard performance.

890405:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of April because of substandard performance.

890503:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of May because of substandard performance.

890512:  Applicant's physical appearance does not meet acceptable Marine Corps standards. Request medical evaluation. Applicant's present weight is 221 pounds with a percent body fat of 26 percent. Applicant advised to lose 2 pounds per month and a total of 12 pounds within a 6-month period as a realistic goal.

890512:  Appropriately Credentialed Health Care Provider: Applicant's physical appearance is not due to a pathological disorder. Recommend loss of 4 pounds per month and a total of 24 pounds within 6 months as a realistic goal.

890601:  Applicant assigned to weight control program.

890601:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Exceed weight standards per MCO 6100.10. Overweight by 24 pounds.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
890601:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of June because of substandard performance and failure to meet prescribed weight standards and standards of military appearance.

890701:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of July because of substandard performance and failure to meet prescribed weight standards and standards of military appearance.

890801:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of August because of substandard performance and failure to meet prescribed weight standards and standards of military appearance.

890901:  Applicant acknowledged that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the month of September because of substandard performance and failure to meet prescribed weight standards and standards of military appearance.

900412:  Co unseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Constantly falls out of platoon runs and hikes, his appearance is unsatisfactory due to his weight, failure to make it into work on time has become a trend, sets a poor example for the younger marines, and lacks leadership qualities. After numerous counseling sessions he has failed to correct these deficiencies.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

 900424:  Medical record: A: Ankle sprain. P: Refer to MOE, Xray, medicate, crutches. Light duty, return to BAS in 5 days for followup.
900503:  Medical record: A: Grade II sprain. P: Splint, crutches Lt duty.

 900525:  Medical record: 2 nd degree sprain right ankle.
900529:  Medical record: Cast for 6 wks for ankle for tendonitis - cast removed; today still complains of some tenderness. Limited duty for 7 days. Reeval in 7 days.
900605:  Medical record: Right heel pain for 2 months. Not resolved with short cast. Please do bone scan.

 900607:  Weight Control Survey Chart: Starting weight: 228. Goal: 209.

900614:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 223 pounds.

900623:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 233 pounds.

900705:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 234 pounds.
900709:  Bone scan. Impression: Very intense activity in the region of the navicular bone or talonavicular junction suggestive of possible fracture of the navicular bone or possible osteonecrosis in the last reparative phase. Other possibilities would include the sever degenerative changes or inflammatory changes in this region. The other mild diffuse increased activity of the ankle and foot are consistent with degenerative inflammatory changes. Would recommend clinical correlation and correlation with plain films of these areas.
900713   Weight Control Survey Chart: 233 pounds.
900720:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 232 pounds.

 900802:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 232 pounds.
900808:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 235 pounds.
900811:  NHCP: Complaint: Ankle swelling inside of cast. Applicant instructed to return to Podiatry department at 0800, 15 Aug 90.
900817:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 239 pounds.

 900823:  Medical record: S: sprain ankle 4 months ago, inversion sprain. Has been casted, splinted and braced. No formal PT. P: 1 heel cord stretch, 2 Baps, 3 Bike, 4 tubing to strength planter/dorsa fl, 5 ice daily x 3 wks. Limited duty for 3 weeks. Recheck 3 weeks.
900824:  Medical record: History of ankle sprain. Light duty for 14 days.

 900829:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 234 pounds.
900906:  Weight Control Survey Chart: 235 pounds.
901024:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general). The factual basis for the recommendation was the persistent failure to meet weight standards as a direct result of a lack of self-discipline, apathy or excessive voluntary intake of food and drink.
901024:  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.
901119:  Commanding Officer recommended an honorable discharge by reason of Unsatisfactory Performance – Failure to conform to weight standards. The factual basis for the recommendation was the persistent failure to meet weight standards as a direct result of a lack of self-discipline, apathy or excessive voluntary intake of food and drink.
901213:  Podiatry Clinic: Non deployable. LD for 4 wks. Possible med board.

 910102:  GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, CA] directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of Unsatisfactory Performance – Failure to conform to weight standards.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

 Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 910129 under honorable conditions (general) due to unsatisfactory performance – failure to conform 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 not proper or equitable (C and D).
Issue 1. The Board found the applicant’s discharge should have been based upon his performance and conduct average markings (E). The applicant’s average markings are above the minimum standard required for an honorable discharge. Relief is therefore granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Paragraph 6206, UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 920309, except for subparagraph 1, which was retroactively changed by ALMAR 57/93, effective 920310) .

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.

E. Table 1-1, Characterization of Service, Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D, effective 890627 until 920309, except for subparagraph 1, which was retroactively changed by ALMAR 57/93, effective 920310) .

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 “ afls14.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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01356

    Original file (MD04-01356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s service was marred by numerous adverse counseling entries for unsatisfactory performance and conduct relating to his billet assignments, substandard physical fitness, and failure to make progress while assigned to the weight control program. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500755

    Original file (MD0500755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The basis for discharge is the Applicant's failure to meet standards for weight control and body fat composition. Commanding Officer's comments: "Based on Lance Corporal C_'s (Applicant's) failure to meet the Marine Corps Standards for weight control and body fat, it is requested that he be separated from the Marine Corps with a general discharge." The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00442

    Original file (MD99-00442.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00442 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990203, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 931012: Medical Department: Weight 200.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067233C070402

    Original file (2002067233C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After the applicant was placed in the weight loss program for the third time, his commander informed him that a bar to reenlistment was going to be initiated. On or about 14 September 1990, the applicant was placed in the Army Weight Control Program for the third time. On 2 October 1990, a bar to reenlistment on the applicant based upon his entering the Army Weight Control Program for the third time was initiated.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01762

    Original file (PD-2013-01762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Normal ankle and foot exam. For the ankle condition, the VA applied code 5271 (limited motion of the ankle) and rated it 10% consistent with “moderate” based on “minimal functional impairment.”Since the NARSUM and C&P exams addressed both the foot and ankle conditions together, the Board first considered which exam was the most probative exam on which to base its rating recommendation. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • 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 | 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 | 2001_Marine | MD01-00313

    Original file (MD01-00313.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Unsatisfactory Performance-Failure to conform to weight standards (administrative discharge board not required), authority: MARCORSEPMAN, Para 6206.1. Assistance/sources provided, but discharge warning issued.900214: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 920320 under honorable conditions (general) due to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025142

    Original file (20100025142.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records show he underwent several unit weigh-ins during 1982 and 1983 and in each case he exceeded the weight and height table of Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program). On 7 February 1984, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of unsatisfactory performance. The evidence of record shows the applicant...

  • 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...