Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500837
Original file (ND0500837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND05-00837

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20050419, 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050812. 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. 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, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“Veteran request RE-Code to be upgraded to RE-1.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Medical Report from Arizona Inst. of Neurology & Psychiatry dtd Feb 22, 2005 (2 pgs)
Neurology Evaluation from Arizona Inst. of Neurology & Psychiatry dtd Mar 23, 2005
Applicant’s DD214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     001130 - 001219  COG
         Active: None                      

Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 001220               Date of Discharge: 010215

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 01 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 29                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 14+              AFQT: NA*

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA*                  Behavior: NA*             OTA: NA*

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*Not available

 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 :
001221:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (fraudulent induction as evidenced by your failure to disclose required basic enlistment eligibility information), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.     

010117:  Applicant reports to medical: 29 year old WM states he’s been having symptoms of seizures. States that his body tenses and jerks at night. No witnesses. States that he has had 1 seizure in past – age 22. This had occurred 2x at night since starting bootcamp.
         Assessment/Diagnosis: Unlikely seizures due to 2d full awareness during events.

010205:  USS TRANQUILITY Medical Clinic, Naval Hospital, Great Lakes, IL Entry Level Medical Separation evaluation for EPTE Conditions: Diagnosis: Seizure Disorder.
         The condition is not correctable to meet Navy standards and the patient did not have a waiver to come into service with condition.
         Comments: Patient states has MVA at age 16 in high school and since then had seizures.
        
010208:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due erroneous enlistment as evidenced by seizure disorder.
010208:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with qualified counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

010209:  Commanding Officer, Recruit Training Command, authorized the Applicant’s entry level separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by seizure disorder.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010215 with an uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to failed medical/physical procurement standards (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 (B and C).

 By regulation, members notified of intended recommendation for discharge within the first 180 days of enlistment are eligible for an uncharacterized or entry-level separation characterization of service. Unless there were unusual circumstances regarding a servicemember’s performance or conduct that would merit an honorable characterization, an uncharacterized discharge is generally considered the most appropriate characterization of a member’s service. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than two months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable.

The documentation provided by the Applicant was not sufficient to overturn the presumption that the Applicant was properly diagnosed with seizure disorder. The Applicant was diagnosed with seizure disorder, which existed prior to entry, by a competent medical authority on 20010205. The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation was improper or inequitable. Relief denied.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. 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. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 until 12 Jun 01, Article 1910-130 (formerly 3620280), Separation by Reason of Defective Enlistments and Inductions - Erroneous Enlistment.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

 C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600535

    Original file (ND0600535.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “ Medical. I authorize separation from the naval service with an Entry Level Separation.” PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19990728 by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to failed medical/physical procurement standards (A)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600652

    Original file (ND0600652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant claims he had no history of seizure disorder before enlisting.Applicant is requesting his characterization of service be changed to general based on equitable relief. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not...

  • 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 | 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 | ND01-00554

    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...

  • 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00708

    Original file (ND04-00708.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FSM served on active service from November 4, 2002 to December 2, 2002 at which time he was discharged due to Failed medical / physical procurement standards. Since his discharge the FSM has been seen by medical specialist that have determined that the right ear pain was caused by Temporomandibular joint disorder and is considered temporary and un-related to the hearing loss. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600715

    Original file (ND0600715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Applicant testified that the above medical condition existed prior to enlistment in the United States Navy. 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 Instruction...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00695

    Original file (ND03-00695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-FA, USN Docket No. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040212. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00086

    Original file (ND02-00086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AR, USN Docket No. The applicant requested a documentary record 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 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.