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

ex-Cpl, USMC
Docket No. MD01-00546

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010319, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010906.  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 four to one 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.  I received a General Under Honorable Conditions just based on my weight problem.  I received a Good Conduct Medal.  I just didn't know how to handle my problem with the weight that was my only problem.  I had never been court martialed, never got into any problems, always got a 1st Class PFT and never had a problem with my daily runs.  I just couldn't lose the weight.  The Marines took my uniform from me.  Now you guys want to take my benefits.  Let me continue my journey and let me upgrade myself so I could be an asset to today's society.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Applicant's letter to the Board
Applicant's letter to CG, MCB Hawaii dtd Aug 6, 1999 concerning discharge
CG, MCB Hawaii's ltr dtd Aug 6, 1999
CO, Hdqtrs Battalion, MCB Hawaii ltr of Aug 6, 1999 concerning Admin Separations Orders with FIRST ENDORSEMENT
Copy of DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:    USMC		940118 - 971023	HON
	Inactive:  USMCR(J)		931213 - 940117	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  971024		Date of Discharge:  990818

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  09  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  37

Highest Rank:  Cpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.4 (6)		Conduct:  4.5 (6)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: M16A2 Rifle Expert Badge, NDSM, SSDR (2), HSM (2), JMUA (2), GCM, LOA (2), NATO Medal, MUC (2), AFEM, AFSM

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:

971024:	Reenlisted for term of 4 years at Camp Lejeune, NC.

980212:	Credentialed Health Care Provider, Kaneohe Branch Clinic, MCB Hawaii:  Applicant's physical condition is not due to a pathological disorder, fit for participation in physical exercise program, and recommended loss of 4 pounds per month and a total of 23 pounds within six months is a realistic goal. 

980212:	Assigned to Weight Control Program.  Ht - 67", Wt - 198 pounds and percent body fat of 29 percent.  Advised that loss of 4 pounds per month for a total of 24 pounds within a 6-month period is realistic goal.

980814:	Weigh in at 196 pounds, 29% body fat.

980707:	Acknowledged eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Sgt for the Jul, Aug, Sep promotion period because of currently being on the Weight Control Program.

990129:	Counseled concerning failure to make satisfactory progress while assigned to weight/remedial physical training, advise of assistance available and corrective actions.   Discharge warning issued.

990226:	Weight in at 187 pounds, 22% body fat.

990512:	Counseled concerning failure to make satisfactory progress while assigned to weight/remedial physical training, advise of assistance available and corrective actions.   Discharge warning issued.

990628:	Weigh in at 195 pounds, 25% body fat.

990726:	Counseled concerning following deficiencies (specifically inability to maintain proper Marine Corps height and weight standards having been given numerous opportunities to correct deficiencies and have been unable to do so.  Advised being processed for administrative separation.

990802:	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 failure of the Marine Corps' weight control program after being assigned on program on 980212.

990802:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

990802:	Commanding officer recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to failure of the Marine Corps weight control program after being assigned on 980212.

990803:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

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.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 990818 with a general (under honorable conditions) due to unsatisfactory performance 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).

The Board found that the applicant’s failure to meet weight standards constituted valid grounds for administrative separation under honorable conditions (general) by reason of unsatisfactory performance.  Therefore, the Board finds 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