Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500064
Original file (ND1500064.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20141010
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USNR (DEP)       20090714 - 20100524     Active: 

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Current Enlistment: 20100525     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20140521      Highest Rank/Rate: HN
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 27 Day(s)
Education Level:         AFQT: NFIR
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 3.2 (6)     Behavior: 2.5 (6)        OTA: 3.17

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Pistol ACM(2) EFMFWS

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:

- 20121017:      Article (Absence without leave)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20120426:      For failure to obey order or regulation.

- 20120724:      For dereliction of duty.

- 20121017:      For assignment to the force preservation program.










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 21, effective 1 September 1998 until
5 December 2001, 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 December 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 IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.


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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for G. I. Bill benefits.
2. The Applicant contends his in-service conduct warrants an upgrade to Honorable.
3. The Applicant contends mental trauma due to in-service experiences was a mitigating factor in his weight control failure.
4.       The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable since his commanding officer recommended an Honorable characterization.

Decision

Date: 20150205            Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of
the Narrative Reason shall WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE.

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) warnings and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, 1 specification). Based on the Applicant’s weight control failure, command administratively processed for separation. 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 a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for G. I. Bill 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.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his in-service conduct warrants an upgrade to Honorable. The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. The characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends mental trauma due to in-service experiences was a mitigating factor in his weight control failure. The NDRB 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. Other than the Applicant’s statement indicating he experienced mental trauma due to in-service experiences, he provided no evidence reflecting his mental trauma as the cause for his weight control failure, and his statement alone is not enough to refute the presumption of regularity. His record contained a voluntary psychiatric evaluation dated 5 February 2014. The Applicant was diagnosed with Axis I Insomnia; Alcohol Dependence in Partial Remission (by hx). He attended the substance abuse rehabilitation program (SARP) outpatient care and was provided civilian in-patient treatment for alcohol dependence in 2012. It was determined that the Applicant had no other significant encounters or diagnoses and did not meet the criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). After an exhaustive review, the Board found no evidence of any mental trauma resulting in the Applicant’s weight control failure in his service or medical record. Therefore, the Board concluded the command acted appropriately, equitably, and properly in processing the Applicant for separation. Relief denied.

Issue 4: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable since his commanding officer recommended an Honorable characterization. The commanding officer's recommendation for separation is just that, a recommendation. In a similar fashion, the advice from the JAG counsel is only his professional opinion. Neither the commanding officer nor the JAG counsel was the Separation Authority. The Separation Authority determines whether the allegations in the notification of the basis for separation are substantiated by the evidence. The Separation Authority was the Commanding General, 2nd Marine Division. The NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity and determined the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. 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 WEIGHT CONTROL FAILURE. 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500778

    Original file (MD1500778.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s record also shows she counseled for use of an unauthorized weight control substance, and for refusing follow-on medical treatment for anorexia nervosa after her release from in-patient care. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300108

    Original file (ND1300108.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201587

    Original file (MD1201587.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s record of service to include average Proficiency and Conduct markings of 4.0 and 3.8, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400184

    Original file (MD1400184.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. Paragraph 6215, WEIGHT...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801904

    Original file (MD0801904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    For the edification of the Applicant, any misconduct that occurs while other processes are in work, such as; administrative separations due to medical or mental health issues, will take precedence when determining the Applicant’s character of service. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300961

    Original file (MD1300961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. In accordance with the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN), the characterization of service for administrative separations due to Weight Control Failure will be Honorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions) as warranted by the member’s service record. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200226

    Original file (MD1200226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record did reflect the Applicant failed to meet established height and weight standards after being placed in the weight control program for 13 months. Based on the evidence of record, coupled with the fact that no reason for discharge was contemplated by the command prior to the Applicant’s weight control failure, the NDRB determined the quality of the Applicant’s service met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel. Since full relief had been...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400589

    Original file (MD1400589.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 6105 counseling warnings. Applicable regulations state that characterization of service for administrative separations due to weight control failures will be Honorable or General (Under Honorable Conditions) as warranted by the member’s service record. ” Additional...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101592

    Original file (MD1101592.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100044

    Original file (ND1100044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.