Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000928
Original file (ND1000928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MMFN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100223
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: MISCONDUCT
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20060329 - 20060530     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060531     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090603      Highest Rank/Rate: MMFA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 59
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.8 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 2.83

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20061201 :      Article (Assault)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20061204 :       For assault.
- 20090421 :       For failure to meet body composition assessment standards and failure to meet physical readiness test standards.
Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

Block 25, Separation Authority, should read: “MILPERSMAN 1910-170”
 “JFT ”
         “ PHYSICAL STANDARDS ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.


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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation :           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 21 May 2008 until 11 February 2010, MILPERSMAN Article 1910-170, SEPARATION BY REASON OF PHYSICAL FITNESS ASSESSMENT FAILURE .

 B. NAVADMIN 180/05, 271525Z JUL 05, PHYSICAL READINESS PROGRAM.


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant contends his discharge should not be based on PRT failures but should be based on his record of service.

Decision

Date: 20110414 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

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

Discussion

 The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning, and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Assault) . Based on the failure to maintain physical standards, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should not be based on PRT failures but should be based on his record of service. Despite a Sailor’s prior record of service, certain conditions warrant separation from the N aval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant’s command discharged him because of his inability to conform to Navy physical standards. At one time, the Applicant was over 100 pounds over his max imum allowable we ight with 41 percent body fat. While his command was proper in discharging him from the Navy, it used an NJP conviction for assault that occurred three years earlier in his enlistment as the basis for discharge. The NDRB deemed this inequitable and determined that the proper basis for discharge was Physical Standards. The Applicant’s discharge characterization of service, General (Under Honorable Conditions), however, was equitable in light of the NJP conviction during his current enlistment. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety in the discharge action but did discern an inequity in the N arrative R eason for S eparation. The Board’s vote was 5-0 that the characterization of the discharge (General) shall remain as issued. However, by a 5-0 vote , the narrative reason for the discharge shall change to “Physical Standards,” as it was the true reason the Applicant was discharged.
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 and the narrative re ason for separation shall change to PHYSICAL STANDARDS . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Revie ws and Post-Service Conduct .


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301812

    Original file (ND1301812.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101594

    Original file (ND1101594.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. 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...

  • 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800702

    Original file (ND0800702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700878

    Original file (ND0700878.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date: 20080103Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion Issue 1: 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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101910

    Original file (ND1101910.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000189

    Original file (ND1000189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, three evaluation and counseling reports reflected the Applicant failed four physical readiness tests from the Spring of 2004 through the Fall of 2005. After considering all the available evidence, in light of the fact the administrative separation package is missing and in consideration of the fact there is no misconduct or substandard performance documented in her record, the Board found that her administrative separation was proper, but the characterization of service was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700087

    Original file (ND0700087.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:19980623Reason for Discharge Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 19980623Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of DocumentsSubmit Statement (date)Administrative Board GCMCA Review Separation Authority (date):COMMANDING OFFICER, U. S. NAVAL AIR STATION KEFLAVIK (19980629)Reason for discharge directed:WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURECharacterization directed:UNDER HONORABLE...

  • 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...