Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900644
Original file (ND0900644.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MMFN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090127
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: PHYSICAL STANDARDS
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN PHYSICAL FITNESS ASSESSMENT FAILURE

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:

Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20030530 - 20040209     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20040210     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070117      Highest Rank/Rate: MMFN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 50
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

On 20050729 for Physical Fitness Assessment Failure.
Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:     
DD 214:         Service/ Medical Record:                  Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:              
         Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records: 
         Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status: 
         Community Service:                References:              
Additional Statements :
From Applicant:        From Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 12, effective 3 August 2005 until Present, Article 1910-170, SEPARATION BY REASON OF PHYSICAL FITNESS ASSESSMENT FAILURE

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .


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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Seeking to use VA benefits.
2. Served three years.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0416             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PHYSICAL STANDARDS .

Discussion

: The Applicant is seeking an upgrade in order to obtain VA benefits. either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraph concerning , for additional information regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his three years of service. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The record reflects the Applicant was administratively processed for discharge due to failure t o pass four physical fitness assessments in a four year period. Pursuant to MILPERSMAN 1910 - 170, a service member processed for discharge under this provision should receive an honorable characterization unless an entry level or general is warranted based on the record of service. In the Applicant’s case, the record reflects the Applicant had no misconduct and one retention warning for failure to meet physical readiness test standards. His overall trait average was 3.50. In applying the requirements of MILPERSMAN 1910-170, to this case, the Board determined an honorable discharge is appropriate based on the absence of misconduc t during this enlistment. T he Board discerned no impropriety in the discharge action but did discern an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service and voted unanimously to upgrade the character of discharge to honorable. Therefore, relief is warranted.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, and Discharge Process , the Board found

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000 . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at http://Boards.law.af.mil .

Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the 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 additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval 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.

Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900111

    Original file (ND0900111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. For the Applicant’s edification, the RE Code is assigned by the separation authority based on the reason for the discharge and is used to determine whether or not one may reenlist or enlist in another branch of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900301

    Original file (ND0900301.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pursuant to MILPERSMAN 1910-170, administrative separation processing ismandatory for members when they do not achieve prescribedphysical readiness standards by failing to pass three physicalfitness assessment (PFA) cycles in a 4-year period.Per the Administrative Separation Notice of 9 July 2007, the Applicant was notified of administrative processing due to PFA failure and subsequently discharged.Members discharged on the basis of failure to meetphysical standards should receive...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000928

    Original file (ND1000928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. However, by a 5-0 vote, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700981

    Original file (ND0700981.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Date Notified: 20060823Reason for Discharge:PHYSICAL FITNESS ASSESSMENT FAILURE Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20060823Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) GCMCA review Separation Authority (date): Commanding Officer, USS GEORGE WAHSINGTON (CVN 73) (20060830)Reason for discharge directed: PHYSICAL FITNESS ASSESSMENT FAILURE Characterization directed: Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900631

    Original file (ND0900631.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000860

    Original file (ND1000860.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Narrative Reason for Discharge:Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800018

    Original file (ND0800018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After assuring compliance with MILPERSMAN 1910-170 the separation authority directed the Applicant’s discharge by reason of physical standards with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The Applicant’s conduct reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade in his characterization of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801740

    Original file (ND0801740.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the Applicant’s case, the record reflects the Applicant had no misconduct and one retention warning for failure to meet physical readiness test standards. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200525

    Original file (ND1200525.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for the G.I. However, based on the Applicant’s physical fitness assessment failures, command administratively processed for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500917

    Original file (ND1500917.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall change to but the narrative reason for separation shall remain PHYSICAL STANDARDS. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...