Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00705
Original file (ND01-00705.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SA, USNR-R
Docket No. ND01-00705

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010424, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 011127. 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/Erroneous enlistment - enlisted, reenlisted, extended, or inducted in error), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620280.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues

1. I respectfully request that my discharge be reviewed and changed to General -under Honorable conditions. I make this request so that I may continue my career in law enforcement with a very prestigious department. Under my current character of service, I am not able to obtain employment with this department. Your consideration with this matter is greatly appreciated.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
St. Louis County and Municipal Open Enrollment Recruit Program
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: 920729 - 921208
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 921209               Date of Discharge: 930126

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 00 01 18
          Inactive: 00 04 09
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 13                        AFQT: 91
Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION/Erroneous enlistment - enlisted, reenlisted, extended, or inducted in error, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620280.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :
920728:  Report of Medical Examination upon entry: Applicant did give a history of left knee surgery.

 921223:  Medical Board Report: Diagnosis: Chondromalacia Patella Left, EPTE.


 930111:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment.
930111:  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.
930114:  Commanding officer directed discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930126 with an entry level separation for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (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 has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities as requested in the issue. The Board’s charter limits its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service as “Entry Level Separation” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance or conduct that would merit an “honorable” characterization. The applicant’s record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his service to warrant a change of discharge to “honorable”. In the applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.
Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.




Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective 15 Aug 91 until 4 Mar 93, Article 3620280, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00650

    Original file (ND99-00650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970821 with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found this to be a non-decisional issue. You...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00237

    Original file (ND00-00237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940416 Date of Discharge: 940712 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 00 20 Inactive: 00 02 07 PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00782

    Original file (ND00-00782.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00782 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000531, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or entry level separation or uncharacterized. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00324

    Original file (ND01-00324.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991230 with an Uncharacterized service for Defective enlistment and induction due to Erroneous enlistment (A). The Board determined, the medical exam was performed by competent medical authority and the applicant was diagnosed with dysthymic disorder. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00016

    Original file (ND01-00016.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant should consult a recruiter to determine requirements for reenlistment. 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00303

    Original file (ND01-00303.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).The applicant’s issue states: “My discharge was due to me being a scared 19 yr. old. 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. PART IV...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01048

    Original file (ND99-01048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant did not object to the discharge.921210: CO, RTC, Orlando, FL directed the applicant's discharge with an entry level separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment by reason of Orthopedic pre-service condition. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 921217 with an entry level separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (A). In the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00656

    Original file (ND03-00656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The doctor continued to interrogate me while under these psych meds. Highest global assessment of functioning in the past year is unknown.020730: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by psychotic disorder. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00200

    Original file (ND02-00200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-FR, USNR Docket No. ND02-00200 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020107, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01331

    Original file (ND02-01331.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    990712: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by personality disorder and convenience of the government due to physical or mental conditions as evidenced by a cyclothymic disorder. The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than three months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to...