Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00442
Original file (ND01-00442.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00442

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010223, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010719. 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: UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/FAILED MEDICAL/PHYSICAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280).
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. I am requesting a discharge charge for the reason that I never wanted to be discharged nor did I do anything to constitute it. The reason for my separation was never completely revealed to me. All the questions I asked received a vague or incomplete answer. To my knowledge the discharge was based on something medical, such maybe the headaches that I endure while there. This so called condition of my headaches started in training and persisted afterwards. These headaches were though to be stress related. Shortly after my discharge I visited my family doctor who discovered holes in both ear drums. He suggested medication, the headaches have stop and not returned. I feel that I was wrongfully discharged because of a gross oversite. I can supply the medical records if need be.

I gratefully thank you for your time.

 Documentation
Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     980608 - 980729  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980730               Date of Discharge: 980827

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 00 28
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 77

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/FAILED MEDICAL/PHYSICAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :
980608:  Report of Medical Examination upon entry: Applicant failed to disclose frequent/severe headaches.

980814:  Naval Hospital, Branch Medical Clinic, Great Lakes: 19 year old male with complaint of headaches for 2 weeks. Pt says he was seen Wednesday by a doctors and prescribed Motrin. "It doesn't make a dent in the pain" 8.5 on pain scale. Worst during PT. Denies history of diagnosis of migraine. Pt states headaches came on during flight to boot camp but has no history of problems flying - temporal pain.
         Assessment: Possible tension headache
         Plan: Tylenol 325 mg 2 tablets. Follow-up 8-17-98.

980817:  Naval Hospital, Branch Medical Clinic, Great Lakes: 19 year old male with complaint of headaches on and off for three weeks. Pt has been treated with Motrin and Tylenol without relief. This is the 3 rd visit to medical for this. Pt want something done to stop the headaches. No other complaints at this time. No history of migraines or cluster headaches.
         Assessment: Headaches
         Plan: Continue Tylenol as before, Neuro consult, Pt educated.

980819:  Medical evaluation (Branch Medical Clinic, Great Lakes): Entry Level Medical Separation for EPTE condition. Diagnosis: Tension Headaches - recurrent & interfering with daily training. Condition s not correctable. Pt did not have a waiver to come into service with condition. Patient instructed to follow-up with known civilian provider.

980821:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of Defective enlistment and induction due to Erroneous enlistment as evidenced by tension headaches.
980821:  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.

980824:  CO, RTC, Great Lakes directed the applicant's discharge with an Entry Level Separation (Uncharacterized) by reason of Defective enlistment and induction due to Erroneous enlistment (Failed medical/physical procurement standards - tension headaches).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980827 with an Uncharacterized service for Defective enlistment and induction due to Erroneous enlistment (Failed medical/physical procurement standards) (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 applicant states, his enlistment was wrong because of a gross over-site. The applicant’s abbreviated Navy career lasted 28 days. An uncharacterized Entry Level Separation discharge is the only discharge he qualifies for, as a result of the short duration. There were no noteworthy, honorable events that occurred during his short military career, which would warrant an upgrade of his discharge to Honorable. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 until PRESENT, Article 1910-130 (formerly 3620280), Separation by Reason of Defective Enlistments and Inductions - Erroneous Enlistment.

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 " afls10.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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00431

    Original file (ND01-00431.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Entry level medical separation for an EPTE condition. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 001103 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by chronic tension type headaches (failed medical/physical procurement standards) (A). Relief is not warranted.The applicant’ s second issue states: “I believe my discharge should be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00749

    Original file (ND02-00749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 010829 with an uncharacterized service (entry level separation) for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (A). 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: An Entry Level Separation (ELS) is not a dishonorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00066

    Original file (ND99-00066.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    code on my discharge papers changed to an R.E.-3 so that I may go back in Please consider me for re-enlistment into the U.S. Navy by changing the R.E. 971217: Branch Medical Clinic, Great Lakes evaluation (podiatry): Diagnosis - Pes Planus with symptoms, entry level medical separation for EPTE condition. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge and the reason for discharge was proper and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01018

    Original file (ND99-01018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When I joined the United States Navy, I was planning to remain in that branch as my career. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 950202 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) by reason of erroneous enlistment due to failure of medical/physical procurement standards (A). You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00479

    Original file (ND03-00479.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Entry Level Medical Separation – Lateral Meniscal Tear.001121: USS TRANQUILLITY Medical Clinic, Naval Hospital, Great Lakes, IL: Entry Level Medical Separation due to diagnosis Knee Arthralgia, Chronic. 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).By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00569

    Original file (ND01-00569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00569 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. My discharge was an uncharacterized Entry Level Separation and would like my level raised to an RE-1, so that I may re-enlist into the United States Navy.I was born with Optical Neuropathy, which is optic nerve damage. The Board reviewed the applicant’s record and found the Uncharacterized (Entry Level Separation)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00389

    Original file (ND02-00389.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My undesirable discharge was improper because it was based on a waiverble pre-existing medical condition that had in no way any affect on the pain I was seen for. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Six pages from Applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980727 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00106

    Original file (ND01-00106.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. I never had problems with my knee before training.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00388

    Original file (ND02-00388.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since the date of his discharge, Fireman (Applicant) has attempted to obtain copies of his medical records from the Navy and the Great Lakes Training Center in order to present with this Petition. I respectfully submit that this sailor should not suffer the lifelong consequences and stigma of a bar to reenlistment due to being overly medicated by non-physician personnel within the Navy who failed to check the drug interaction consequences of the significant doses of antihistamines,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00670

    Original file (ND00-00670.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION For the applicant’s service to be characterized as Honorable he must have served over 180 days or have such meritorious service that would warrant an honorable discharge. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.