Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401738

Original file (ND1401738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-IS2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20140905

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USNR (DEP)       20040629 - 20050508     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Current Enlistment: 20050509    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090421     Highest Rank/Rate: IS2
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 13 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 95
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 3.8 (4)     Behavior: 3.0 (4)       OTA: 3.52

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:

SCM:

SPCM:

CIVIL ARREST:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20071110:      For first failure of Physical Fitness Assessment (PFA)

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:                  Other Documentation:
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:          From/To Representation:          From/To Congress member:

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violations of the UCMJ, Articles 91, and 92.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because it was too harsh based on his service record.

Decision

Date: 20141216 Location: Washington D.C. 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. 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 for failure of Physical Fitness Assessment (PFA). The Applicant’s service record is incomplete; however, his finale performance evaluation ending on 15 March 2009 states that he failed a second PFA during Fall 2008, was disrespectful to a senior noncommissioned officer, and disobeyed lawful orders to attend a command directed Fitness Enhancement Program (FEP). The Applicant received a 1.0 (below standards) mark for Military Bearing/Character on his evaluation for the period of April 2008 until March 2009. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because it was too harsh based on his service record. The Applicant states that he missed one Fitness Enhancement Program (FEP) session because he had stood watch, and a senior chief tried to make him attend an extra FEP that the Applicant felt was unnecessary. Also, the Applicant states that he had only failed two PFAs during his service in the Navy, which is less than the three failures requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation. However, the Applicant’s record shows that he was processed for administrative separation based on the commission of a serious offense and not for physical standards. The Applicant’s command determined that he was in violation of the UCMJ by being disrespectful to a non-commissioned officer, and by failure to obey orders to attend FEP after months of no-shows: “His performance is overshadowed by his failure to obey lawful orders and disrespect.” The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that his discharge was too harsh. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Relief denied.

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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS).

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 for additional information.

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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201117

Original file (ND1201117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20020821 - 20030817Active: 20030818 -20070807 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20070808Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20100723Highest Rank/Rate:HT2Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 15 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 71EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(3)Behavior:1.3(3)OTA: 3.04Awards and Decorations...
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 | 2015_Navy | ND1401768

Original file (ND1401768.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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800014

Original file (ND0800014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Additionally, the Board has no authority...
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 | 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400883

Original file (ND1400883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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 reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901018

Original file (ND0901018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

There is no evidence in the record or provided by the Applicant to support the contention that he was denied an opportunity to obtain physical therapy. Basedon a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB concluded there was sufficient evidence to support administrative separation of the Applicant due to PFA failure and that a change in the narrative reason is not warranted in light of the evidence of record mentioned supra...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401746

Original file (ND1401746.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Summary: After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001160

Original file (ND1001160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Member failed multiple body fat composition measurements, physical readiness tests, physical fitness assessments, and fails to attend numerous assigned fitness enhancement program sessions.... Due to member’s multiple failures and unwillingness to participate in programs designed to assist her, I strongly recommend separation under General Under Honorable Conditions.” Based on all the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s in-service performance and conduct and with no evidence to...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401738

Similar Decisions