Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00140
Original file (ND01-00140.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00140

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001113, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to medical. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010510. 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 unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION/Entry level performance/conduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630200.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. Medical I (applicant) was to be let out of training do to my jaws and heath at time. A captin at the time gave me a releace form my chief tore it up. The captin was a medical doctor form was sind for my releace for temp tell I regaind my heath.
Heres paper work my doctors are decest al the date are here I went from my jaws being broken to training
I need up grade for gards

Applicant mark the box "I have listed additional issues as an attachment to this application". None were found.


 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of DD Form 215
Copy of response to request for separation documents/information dated August 14, 2000
Copy of form 180, Request Pertaining to Military Records dated March 10, 1999
Copy of operative report dated October 2, 1985
Copy of laboratory reports
Copy of radiology report dated October 7, 1985
Copy of radiology report dated October 2, 1985
Copy of discharge summary dated October 7, 1985

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USANG             841205 - 850328  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     850809 - 851215  COG
                  USANG (DEP)     840928 - 841204  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 851216               Date of Discharge: 860228

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 02 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 27

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION/Entry level performance/conduct; authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630200.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

851226:  Recruit Eval Unit: Diagnosis: Mixed specific development disorder (reading, spelling). Recommendations: Doctor A_ (optometrist) report states that member refraction error is not sufficient to have any significant effect on learning problems. His disorder will interfere with his training and will move extremely frustrating for him. Strongly recommend ELS as reading failure
860206:  Retention Warning: Applicant advised of deficiency in conduct evidenced by not motivated, not putting forth full effort. Corrective actions identified. Sources of assistance included. Advised: further deficiencies may result in disciplinary action and administrative separation. All deficiencies during current enlistment will be considered. Subsequent violations of the UCMJ or conduct resulting in civilian conviction could result in separation under Other Than Honorable conditions. Receipt acknowledged.

860212:  Retention Warning: Applicant advised of deficiency in conduct evidenced by failing academic test. Corrective actions identified. Sources of assistance included. Advised: further deficiencies may result in disciplinary action and administrative separation. All deficiencies during current enlistment will be considered. Subsequent violations of the UCMJ or conduct resulting in civilian conviction could result in separation under Other Than Honorable conditions. Receipt acknowledged.

860223:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of Entry level performance and conduct. Advised least favorable characterization of service would be Entry level separation.

860223:  Commanding officer approved an Entry Level Separation by reason of Entry level performance/conduct.

860224:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 860228 with an Entry Level Separation by reason of Entry level performance/conduct (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). 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 (C and D).

Issue 1. The Board can not respond to the applicant’s one and only issue because we can not determine what his issue is. The applicant must write his/her issue(s) clearly and concisely, in order for the NDRB to respond. The applicant failed to do so. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560), Change 10/85, effective 16 Dec 85 until 14 June 1987, Article 3630200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF ENTRY LEVEL PERFORMANCE CONDUCT.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 " afls14.jag.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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01071

    Original file (ND99-01071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. SNR never actually told me that he refuses training, but then stated he did not think he could take it mentally, counseled SNR that boot camp was meant to be tough and that there was no reason he could not do well, when I told SNR to return to his company, he asked to speak with a chaplain. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00011

    Original file (ND03-00011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In 1998, I was discharged from the Navy based on my performance and conduct. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.980226: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of entry level performance and conduct. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his 2 months and 24 days in the military to warrant a change of discharge to "honorable."

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01230

    Original file (ND02-01230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the discharge should be changed to “general/Under Honorable Conditions” as the discharge was related to a medical condition.After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current Entry Level Separation to that of General, Under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00538

    Original file (ND01-00538.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Advised: further deficiencies may result in disciplinary action and administrative separation. Advised: further deficiencies may result in disciplinary action and administrative separation. The applicant states in issue 1 that his service was honorable and “should be characterized that way.” An entry level separation (uncharacterized) characterization is the normal characterization for those members being separated while in an entry level status.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00174

    Original file (ND01-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record also reflects the FSM's period of active service was honorable, with the only blemish being the civil conviction. He was afforded all of his applicable rights per reference (a), including the right to an Administrative Board, which was conducted on 12 February 1996. based on the offenses committed, and the recommendations of the Administrative Board, it is recommended that BM2 (applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable Discharge. It was caused...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00968

    Original file (ND03-00968.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-PRAA, USN Docket No. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01078

    Original file (ND01-01078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 (C and D).Issue 1 states: “(Equity Issue) This former member opines that his character of service should be upgraded to Honorable and that he should be allowed to re-enlist because the Navy informed him that this would automatically happen after six months.” The applicant served less than 180 days of active duty service. In...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00019

    Original file (ND99-00019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Returned to duty.970307: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of Entry Level Performance and Conduct. Accordingly, SR (applicant's) discharge is approved per reference (a).” PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970314 with an uncharacterized service by reason of entry level performance and conduct (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01310

    Original file (ND03-01310.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or uncharacterized. “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current Uncharacterized discharge (Entry...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00858

    Original file (ND03-00858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FSM served on active service from January 5, 1989 to March 1, 1989 at which time he was discharged due to Entry Level Performance/Conduct. (f) (1).As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C. Advised least favorable...