Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00390
Original file (ND02-00390.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-IC3, USN
Docket No. ND02-00390

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020214, 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. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030107. 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)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-170 (formerly Article 3620260).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. (Equity Issue) This former member avers that his general characterization of service is more harsh than his service record warrants. Not only did his involuntarily separation result in the loss of his Navy career but has also deprived him of his MGIB benefits to train for a new civilian career. He opines that he served honorably and faithfully during his five years of service and merits a fully honorable discharge.

2. (Equity Issue) This former member further 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
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
Thirty four pages from Applicant's service record
Four pictures of Applicant (2 duplicates)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920116 - 920921  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920922               Date of Discharge: 980204

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 05 04 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (+25 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 56

 Highest Rate: IC3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (2)    Behavior: 3.80 (2)                OTA: 3.80
 Performance: 2.33 (3)    Behavior: 1.67 (3)                OTA: 2.43

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, BER, MUC, AFEM, SSR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-170 (formerly Article 3620260).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

920116:  Report of Medical Examination: Weight: 174.

 920922:  Enlistment Physical Examination Report: Weight: 183. Summary of defects and diagnoses: (52) 7 lbs ow 22Sep92 wm CBF = 18%. MBF = 23% (in uniform).
921214:  Weight: 163, body fat: 12%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

931013:  Weight: 165, body fat: 15%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

940516:  Weight: 174, body fat: 18%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

941021:  Weight: 207, body fat: Not listed. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

950509:  Weight: 223, body fat: 23%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

950526:  Weight: 216, body fat: 20%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]
951023:  Weight: 231, body fat: 23%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

951025:  Applicant failed run.

960312:  Comments on performance. Petty Officer (Applicant) failed the PRT run and body fat measurements and is currently participating in the Level One Fitness Program and making progress. [Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record signed 12Mar96 submitted by the Applicant.]

960614:  Weight: 215, body fat: 20%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

961123:  Weight: 236, body fat: 21%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

9611:    Applicant failed run.

970121:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91, violation of UCMJ, Article 92, violation of UCMJ, Article 117. No further information found in service record. [Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record signed 17Jun97, submitted by the Applicant.]

971104:  Weight: 231, body fat: 23%. [Extracted from Risk Factor Screening/ Physical Readiness Test Results.]

971227:  Copy of personal weight control plan. [Extracted from supporting documents submitted by the Applicant.]
971227:  Waiver from administrative separation processing requested by Applicant.
971228:  Commanding Officer forwarded request for waiver, strongly recommending disapproval.
980204:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under honorable conditions (general) by reason of weight control failure.

 Separation/discharge package missing from service record. Medical record is missing also.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 980204 under honorable conditions (general) for weight control failure (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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 (D and E).

Issue 1. A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) 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. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion and four physical readiness test failures within a three year period. The Applicant’s conduct falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

Issue 2. The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident 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, employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documentation 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. Relief not warranted.

The Applicant 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.









Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 12 Dec 97 until 31 Aug 98, Article 1910-170, SEPARATION BY REASON OF WEIGHT CONTROL AND/OR PHYSICAL READINESS TEST FAILURE .

B. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 18, effective
12 Dec 97 until present, Article 6110-010, HEALTH AND PHYSICAL READINESS PROGRAM .

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01130

    Original file (ND02-01130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the service and medical records reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.Department of Veterans Affairs, to Applicant, dated Jul 23, 2002, providing the DD Form 293 to the Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 950221 - 950314 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950315 Date of Discharge: 980310 Length of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01201 (1)

    Original file (ND99-01201 (1).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Applicant's Statement to the Board Copy of DD Form 214 VA' decision on Applicant's claim dtd Sep 1, 1999 Copy of applicant's medical record (154 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 891209 - 951206 HON 860603 - 891208 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 850607 - 860602 COG Period of Service Under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01201

    Original file (ND99-01201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Applicant's Statement to the Board Copy of DD Form 214 VA' decision on Applicant's claim dtd Sep 1, 1999 Copy of applicant's medical record (154 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 891209 - 951206 HON 860603 - 891208 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 850607 - 860602 COG Period of Service Under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00215

    Original file (ND00-00215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920610 Date of Discharge: 951114 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 05 05 (Doesn't exclude UA and confinement time) Inactive: None ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00083

    Original file (ND99-00083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00083 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981014, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Additionally , his overall service record warrants an Honorable discharge, regardless of the three PRT failures.In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue has merit. There is no documentation of any disciplinary action against him, other than the weight control problem, he was selected as the Junior...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00348

    Original file (ND02-00348.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of Applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 911015 - 920401 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920402 Date of Discharge: 980213 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 05 10 12 Inactive: None The Navy Discharge Review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01037

    Original file (ND03-01037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 950308 - 950328 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950329 Date of Discharge:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00835

    Original file (ND03-00835.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 980731: Commander, Submarine Group 9 directed the Applicant's discharge with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of weight control failure. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980810 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for failure of the physical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00643

    Original file (ND00-00643.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 21 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 46 Highest Rate: RM3 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 3.00 (4) Behavior: 1.25 (4) OTA: 2.58 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, GCM Days of Unauthorized Absence: None Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-170...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00245

    Original file (ND03-00245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00245 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021203, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason changed to Retired. Symptom – Pt stated history of active duty weight control. Under current standards, the Board found that the Applicant would not have been administratively separated by reason of weight control failure.