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

 ex-LCpl, USMC 
Docket No. MD03-00181

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021106, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant listed the Preble County Veterans Services as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031017.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  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)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6215.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

“1.  I’m trying to have my discharge changed because my knee was hurt and now because of the limping things got worse.  I feel that I should have a honorable discharge because I was treated unfair because I couldn’t control something while I was hurt and still am.  Know my back hips and back are out of alignment. I want to get medical attention for this.  Also I done my time honorable with two meritorious promotions would of keep going but in to much pain.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USMCR (J)		960227 - 960402	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  960403		Date of Discharge:  980519

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  01  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  63

Highest Rank:  LCpl

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency:  4.5 (5)			Conduct:  4.2 (5)

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)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority:  MARCORSEPMAN 6215.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970304:	Applicant’s weight: 223 pounds, Body Fat: 29.2%.

971028:	Applicant placed on weight control program.  Applicant directed to meet the following weight reduction goal: 4 pounds per month.  Applicant’s goal weight is 221 pounds to be obtained no later that 6 months from this date.

971022:	Applicant’s physical condition does not appear to be due to a pathological disorder.  Applicant’s present weight: 242 pounds, Body Fat: 23.4%.

971208:	Medical Board: Final Diagnosis: Patellofemoral syndrome, right knee, DNEPTE.  Height 72 inches.  Weight 242 pounds.  Boards Opinion: Applicant will be unable to fulfill the duties of an active duty member.  Referred case to Physical Evaluation Board for final disposition.

980120:	Medical Board statement of Patient:  I have been informed that the Medical Board of 8 December 1997 has recommended my case be referred to the Director, Naval Council Boards …  I do not desire to submit a statement in rebuttal.

980223:	Applicant found fit by PEB and desires to rebut.

980225:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Violating Art. 86, UCMJ.  Absent from appointed place of duty on 0730, 980131, to wit: Battalion Weight Control Remedial.]  Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued

980308:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to make satisfactory progress on the Battalion weight control program.]  Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

980408:	Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct.  [Failure to make satisfactory progress on the Battalion weight control program.]  Corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

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 factual basis for the recommendation was failure to maintain Marine Corps height and weight standards as defined in MCO 6100.10 and his failure to make a reasonable effort while assigned to the weight control program as characterized in paragraph 6206.1.   

980514:	SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

980518:	GCMCA [Commanding General, 2d Force Service Support Group] 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 19980519 with a 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 NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, can change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  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 toward those standards after being assigned to the weight control program for “over a year.”  He was determined to be in violation of Marine Corps standards (Not due to a pathological disorder.) by an appropriately credentialed health care provider (ACHCP).  Additionally, he was assigned a target weight and a realistic program of weight loss in order to meet his target weight.  At the time of his discharge from the Marine Corps, the Applicant was 67 pounds and 13% body fat over the maximum for his height.  Relief denied.  

When a Marine’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions.  Characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The applicant’s service was marred by the numerous page 11 counseling entries for failure to maintain Marine Corps standards as set forth in MCO 6100.10 and one counseling entry for unauthorized absence.

The NDRB recognizes that serving in the Marine Corps is very challenging.  
Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that most Marines serve honorably and well thereby earning an honorable discharge.   In fairness to those Marines, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due.  Relief is not warranted.   

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

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 “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