Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100079
Original file (ND1100079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101013
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:      

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20090526 - 20100125     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20100126     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100219      Highest Rank/Rate: AR
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 24 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 60
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NONE         Behavior: NONE   OTA: NONE

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : NONE        S CM : NONE       SPCM: NONE       C C : NONE         Retention Warning Counseling: NONE

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:
         DD 214:           Service/Medical Record:           Other Records:  

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:               Finances:                 Education/Training:     
         Health/Medical Records:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation:           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11 effective 20 June 2005 until Present, Article 1910-130, 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 II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       Applicant wants her Reentry (RE) c ode changed so she can reenlist in the military.
 2.       Applicant contends she was incorrectly diagnosed with having A topic D ermatitis while in basic training and was subsequently discharged due to that diagnosis.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 1129             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : none

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
Discussion

 The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant was diagnosed with Atopic Dermatitis, an inflammatory skin condition. Based on the Applicant’s medical condition not being correctible to meet Navy standards, her command administratively processed her for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived her rights to consult with a qualified counsel , submit a written statement , and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants her RE c ode changed so she can reenlist in the military. Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, it is not authorized to change an RE 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 can make changes to RE codes.

: (Decisional) ( ) . Applicant contends she was incorrectly diagnosed with having A topic D ermatitis while in basic training and was subsequently discharged due to that diagnosis. Competent medical authority diagnosed the Applicant with Atopic Dermatitis, an inflammatory skin condition while at Recruit Training Command . The Applicant provided post-service medical documentation indicating that she does not have A topic D ermatitis but likely has an allergy to nickel or cobalt. However, the Board cannot grant relief , because it cannot overturn a medical diagnosis . Navy regulations direct that members notified of intended recommendation for discharge while in an entry level status (within the first 180 days of enlistment) receive an Uncharacterized characterization of service except in circumstances where service has been so meritorious that an Honorable is clearly warranted. The Applicant’s record showed no meritorious service that would warrant an Honorable characterization of service. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equit y of the discharge. Any matter other than propriety and equity can be address ed to the Board for Correction of Naval Records. The NDRB determined that the discharge process following the diagnosis was proper. For this reason, relief cannot be granted.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable. Because it was proper and equitable , the awarded characterization of service shall UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

 Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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.
Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.
Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01795

    Original file (PD-2013-01795.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI reported flares of the skin with sun exposure only. The diagnosis was atopic (allergic rhinitis) and the examiner opined that increased temperature (rather than sunlight or ultraviolet radiation caused the rash.At a VA dermatology evaluation on 30 September 2004,a month after separation, the CI was using vitamin E lotion only, having “tried and failed”multiple treatments including oral steroids, steroid creams, antihistamines, animmunosuppressant skin cream (Elidel), and “light box...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04517

    Original file (BC 2013 04517.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request for reentry into active duty service due to a disqualifying skin disorder and recommends the change in the RE code to “2C.” A medical progress note on 21 May 13 documents a diagnosis of atopic dermatitis, bilateral peri-orbital region, and indicates that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01602

    Original file (PD-2013-01602.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DATE OF PLACEMENT ON TDRL: 20030706Date of Permanent SEPARATION: 20040720 BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication.The Board did not surmise from the record or PEB ruling in this case that any prerogatives outside the VASRD were exercised.In the matter of the asthma condition and...

  • 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 | BCNR | CY2010 | 00107-10

    Original file (00107-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2010. You were discharged in accordance with your request and the approved findings and recommendation of the medical board on 1 October 1969. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100606

    Original file (ND1100606.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends there were significant personal stressors that overwhelmed her, and she requested a hardship discharge. Representation: NONE By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500550

    Original file (ND1500550.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Per the Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for discharge to a physical disability. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Reenlistment/RE-code : Effective 6...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00291

    Original file (BC-2004-00291.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00291 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be given an exception to policy for her medical disqualification from service due to a history of atopic dermatitis. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200982

    Original file (ND1200982.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority determined the Applicant’s “psychiatric condition affected her potential for performance of expected duties and responsibilities while on active duty and poses a risk if she is retained in the naval service.” Based on the Applicant’s length of service and her diagnosis of adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct, the NDRB determined the assigned characterization of service and narrative reason for separation of service were proper and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00480

    Original file (BC-2002-00480.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She received two Officer Performance Reports during her time in the Air Force. Additional facts pertinent to this case are contained in the evaluations prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force found at Exhibits C and D. _______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends that the applicant’s discharge be upgrade to honorable with the reason for discharge remaining as misconduct since the applicant has not...