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 3rd 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