Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00676
Original file (ND04-00676.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EM3, USN
Docket No. ND04-00676

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040315. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests 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 20050201. 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 4-1 that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PHYSICAL STANDARDS, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-170 (formerly Article 3620260).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “I NEED AN HONORABLE DISCHARGE TO ACCESS MY MONTGOMERY GI BILL. ALSO DURING MY SERVICE I DID MY DUTY TO THE UTMOST OF MY ABILITIES. I RECEIVED MY GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL. I ALSO RECEIVED A CAPTAIN’S LETTER FOR MY WORK.”

 American Legion did not provide any issues.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920919 - 930711  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930712               Date of Discharge: 981109

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 05 03 28
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 92

 Highest Rate: EM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.67 (3)             Behavior: 3.67 (3)                OTA: 3.60        4.0 evals
 Performance: 3.33 (6)             Behavior: 1.67 (6)                OTA: 3.22        5.0 evals
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM, SSDR (2), GCM, LOC

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PHYSICAL STANDARDS, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-170 (formerly Article 3620260).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

920919:  Report of Medical Examination: Purpose of examination: Enlistment. Weight: 186 pounds. Body fat: 21%. Minimum weight: 115. Maximum weight: 176. Maximum body fat: 23%.

961215:  Evaluation Report and Counseling Record: Block 43. Comments on Performance: Block 36: (Mil. BEARING/CHARACTER) Failed run on semiannual PRT cycle 2-96.

971223:  Evaluation Report and Counseling Record: Block 43. Comments on Performance: Block 36: (Military Bearing/Character) - Failed to meet body weight standard.

980512:  Applicant to clinic for PRT screen. Currently at 25% body fat. Second failure for body fat. In remedial PT Assessment: Over fat second failure. Plan: 1) Cleared for PRT. 2) Continue remedial PT. 3) Recommend Level III for weight control. 4) Weight loss of 25 lbs.

980708:  Evaluation Report and Counseling Record: Block 43. Comments on Performance: Block 36: (Military Bearing/Character) - Failed to meet body fat standards for second consecutive PRT cycle.

980916:  Medical entry: Weight: 220 pounds.

981027:  Applicant to clinic for PRT screen. Assessment: Over weight third failure. Plan: 1) Cleared for PRT. 2) Recommend administrative separation.

981030:  Evaluation Report and Counseling Record: Block 43. Comments on Performance: Block 36: (Military Bearing/Character) - Failed to meet body fat standards for third consecutive PRT cycle.
981109:  DD 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of failure of the physical readiness test due to not meeting the prescribed physical readiness standards, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-170.

 PARTIAL DISCHARGE PACKAGE

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19981109 with a general (under honorable conditions) for failure of the physical readiness test due to not meeting the prescribed physical readiness standards (A and B). After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D). The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (E).

Issue 1: 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 was discharged for failing to meet the prescribed physical readiness standards. The applicant’s performance marks, which form the primary basis for determining the character of his service, fall below that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

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

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time. 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), Change 21, effective 01 Sep 98 until 5 Dec 01, MILPERSMAN 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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00284

    Original file (ND04-00284.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Light duty for 14 days.930413: Medical Record: No PRT spring cycle. 951204: Counseling: Applicant advised that he failed to meet the physical readiness standards due to being overfat (body fat in excess of 22%) and placed on the command’s sponsored physical conditioning program.

  • 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 | ND00-00643

    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 | ND03-01037

    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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00929

    Original file (ND99-00929.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00929 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990629, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. During that time I was denied leave several times, because the XO and CO said I failed the PRT. In Washington state upon being discharged I was told that I could receive all my VA benefits including the GI Bill for School with this General (under honorable conditions).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07502-97

    Original file (07502-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Block 20 (Physical Readiness) reads The grades she received for these making her ineligible for advancement and "F/NS" indicating laims she had a medical waiver from body fat measurements due to medication she was taking which caused weight gain. returned to the medical department to receive a waiver from official body fat measurements. screening would not have changed the outcome, as a medical waiver from body fat measurements was not appropriate for the Fall 1995 PRT cycle.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00585

    Original file (ND99-00585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please review & correct my discharge to HONORABLE! Applicant notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.951029: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault consummated by a battery. 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).In response to applicant’s issue 1,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1997_Navy | ND97-01370

    Original file (ND97-01370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND97-01370 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 970904, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Members not meeting physical readiness standards shall be required to participate in the command-directed physical conditioning program (Level I), which must consist of an exercise component and should also include other Health Promotion Program elements. c. In the course of a discharge review, it is determined that...