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

 ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. 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 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 011108.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was 3 to 2 that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6215.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  Military doctors concentrated more on the Physical problems rather than the psychological and emotional problems.  Stress caused by a premature labor, lack of adjustment time (returned to the states from Okinawa), the lack of help from Command.  Did speak with a Chaplin, did not receive the help or the care needed.

2.  Was given the Depo shot.  Contributed to the weight gain.  Military doctors states that that is not the cause, but civilian doctors differ in opinion.

3.  Served a month shy of three full years.

4.  Need the Honorable discharge to receive the GI Bill that I contributed to.  Will be attending the School of Nursing this Fall of 2001.  Need the money to attend.  Financial Aid does not cover the expenses.

5.  Single mom that needs the GI Bill to attend school.  I am trying not to go on public assistance.

6.  While serving the Military, my performance as a Marine was excellent.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214
Letter from Centra Health, Lynchburg General Hospital, School of Nursing dated February 5, 2001
Letter from Central Virginia Community College dated March 22, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR(J)		970331 - 970511	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970512		Date of Discharge:  000413

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  11  02
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  74

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.6 (9)			Conduct:  4.4 (9)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NUC, SSDR, Letter of Appreciation

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:

970327:	DEP weight: 139.

970331:	Weight waiver approved.

970421:	Applicant pre-enlistment weight: 140 pounds.

970421:	Moral waiver and pre-service drug use waiver approved via PHONCON.

970512:	Applicant's enlistment weight: 136 pounds.

980513:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, underage drinking.  Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.  

980513:	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.  

990827:	Appropriate Credentialed Health Care Provider conducted a physical evaluation and found that applicant is not within Marine Corps weight standards and condition is not due to a pathological disorder.  Current weight 163 pounds.  Body fat: 35%.

990830:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the September 1999 promotion due to weight control.

990831:	Applicant determined to be overweight and in excess of the allowable body fat standard.  Applicant assigned to Battalion Weight Control/Military Appearance Program and Company's Remedial Physical Training Program.

990930:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the October 1999 promotion due to weight control.

991006:	Applicant's weight: 169.  Body Fat: 35%.

991025:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the November 1999 promotion due to weight control.

991103:	Applicant's weight: 170.  Body Fat 34%.
	
991104:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, not making satisfactory progress.  

991117:	Applicant's weight: 168.  Body Fat 35%.

991118:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the December 1999 promotion due to weight control.

991201:	Applicant's weight: 168.  Body Fat 33%.

991215:	Applicant's weight: 168.  Body Fat 34%.
000105:	Applicant's weight: 168.  Body Fat 35%.

000105:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, not making satisfactory progress.  

000107:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the January 2000 promotion due to weight control.

000124:	Applicant's weight: 172.  Body Fat 34%.

000202:	Applicant's weight: 172.  Body Fat 34%.

000216:	Applicant's weight: 172.  Body Fat 34%.

000218:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Specifically, not making satisfactory progress.  

000303:	Applicant reevaluated and found condition not due to a pathological disorder.

000309:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the March 2000 promotion due to weight control.

000315:	Applicant's weight: 172.  Body Fat 35%.

000323:	Applicant informed eligible but not recommended for promotion to Corporal for the April 2000 promotion due to weight control.

000330:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

000331:  	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.

000324:	Commanding officer recommended discharge General (under Honorable conditions) due to weight control failure.  The factual basis for the recommendation was 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.

000403:	GCMCA [Commanding Officer, Headquarters and Support Division] 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 000413 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 and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  The applicant states, military doctors concentrated more on the physical problems rather than the psychological and emotional problems.  The Marine Corps Separations manual states, a Marine may be separated for failure to meet established height and weight standards when it is determined that the member is unqualified for further military service and meets both of the following conditions:  The Marine fails to meet height and weight standards and the sole reason for separation is failure to meet such standards; and the Marine’s performance and conduct otherwise conform with established standards.  Characterization of service will be honorable or general under honorable conditions, as determined by the Marine’s service record, if the Marine is not in an entry level status.

The applicant had an approved pre-service weight waiver (enlistment weight was 136 pounds), in addition to a morale waiver and pre-service drug waver.  She received counseling for underage drinking, in addition to numerous and routine counseling for deficiencies in performance and conduct, related to her failure to meet weight standards.  She had a medical exam by an appropriately credentialed health care provider who determined her weight problem was not due to a pathological disorder.  The applicant was not recommended for promotion to corporal due to her weight control problem.  Her body weight increased to 172 pounds (35% body fat) when notified she was being recommended for discharge.  The Board determined the applicant’s service record contains sufficient negative input to warrant a discharge characterization of General (under Honorable conditions).  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The applicant states, she was given the “Depo” shot, which contributed to her weight gain and there is disagreement between military and civilian doctors concerning the contribution of the “Depo” shot to weight gain.  The Board determined that the applicant did not provide any documentation to show that she was taking any medication that was responsible for her weight gain and that the medication rendered her incapable of losing the excess weight.  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.  She was properly counseled, given an opportunity to correct her deficiency and was unsuccessful in losing the extra weight.  The discharge process was properly executed, in accordance with Marine Corps regulations and the Board determined the discharge characterization was equitably assigned.  Relief is denied.

Issue 3.  The Board determined this is a non-decisional issue.  The applicant states she served a month shy of three full years.  The applicant’s record shows she was on a four year enlistment contract and served only 2 years and 11 months.  Relief based on this issue is denied.

Issue 4 and 5.  The applicant states, she is a single mom and she needs an Honorable discharge to receive the GI Bill that she contributed to.  The Board is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge for the purpose of receiving veteran’s benefits.  The applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief is denied.

Issue 6.  The applicant states her performance as a Marine, was excellent.  The Board agrees that the applicant had Honorable performance and conduct marks (4.6/4.4).  However, her service record contained other negative entries, to include an enlistment waiver for being over weight, a moral waiver, and a pre-service drug waiver.  She was counseled for underage drinking, in addition to numerous counseling entries for failure to meet Marine Corps weight standards.  The Board determined had weight control been the only negative entry in the applicant’s record, her request for upgrade would have been looked at more favorably.  Relief is denied.

The applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support her case at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.

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 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