Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00725
Original file (ND01-00725.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00725

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010430, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and reason for discharge be changed to RE-1. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed New York State Division of Veterans Affairs as his 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 and narrative reason 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

 1. In support of my request for an upgrade in my discharge, please not the attached medical narrative from Dr. H____ and the results of the examination from St. Luke's. Final result form examination, and the doctor's opinion indicate that I am completely well and physically fit.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letter from D____ S. H___, M.D.
Copy of Radiology Consultation from ST. Luke Roosevelt Hospital Center

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990129 - 990307  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990308               Date of Discharge: 990512

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 02 05
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: SR

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NOB                  Behavior: NOB             OTA: NOB

 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 :
990420:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to disclose pre-service civil involvement/convictions: illegal parking, March 1999, New York, NY. You paid fines/fees in the amount of $55.00. Improper plates, March 1999, New York, NY. You paid fines/fees in the amount of $55.00. Curfew violation, March 1999, New York, NY, unpaid. The information concerning the above incident was relied upon from information provided by you at Moment of Truth. Be advised you are required to pay all unpaid tickets. Failure to do so can result in disciplinary and/or administrative actions. Be advised that if any further misconduct is discovered which was not disclosed or the information provided is discovered to be false, this page 13 may be considered void), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.  

990504:  Sports Medicine, USS Tranquility Medical Clinic, 3420 Illinois Street, Great Lakes, IL 60088-5230 Medical Evaluation states SR L____ was examined and found to have a disqualifying conditions (Shoulder Arthropathy, unspec) commonly know as Inflammation of Joints, that Existed Prior To Enlistment, (EPTE).
                 
990507:  Commanding officer recommended discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to failed medical/physical procurement standards.


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 990512 with an uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to 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 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. Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization and narrative reason accurately reflect his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. 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. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. 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 " 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00756

    Original file (ND01-00756.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I think my discharge should be changed on the fact that I was young and irresponsible. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000208 with an Entry level separation (Uncharacterized) for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment - alcohol abuse (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00683

    Original file (ND00-00683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00683 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990707 with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment - drug abuse(A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00846

    Original file (ND00-00846.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00846 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000622, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980203 with an uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (A). Even though the applicant may have received a waiver for his ankle, the fact remains that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00651

    Original file (ND04-00651.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/FAILED MEDICAL/ PHYSICAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280). 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00641

    Original file (ND01-00641.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: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 991203 - 000711 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 000712 Date of Discharge: 000918 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 02 07 Inactive: None SR cannot take any disappointment. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00827

    Original file (ND01-00827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00827 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010530, 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 Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 981221 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00452

    Original file (ND01-00452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/FAILED MEDICAL/PHYSICAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991222 with an uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to failed medical/physical procurement standards (A). After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01435

    Original file (ND03-01435.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01435 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20030909, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :010730: Entry Level...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00430

    Original file (ND02-00430.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since returning home, with proper treatment, my skin has cleared up. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 010507 with an uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to failed medical/physical procurement standards (A). The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00554

    Original file (ND01-00554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/FAILED MEDICAL/PHYSICAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Rx from doctor dated February 22, 2001 (original and copy) Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Seven pages from applicant's service record PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND...