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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00724

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020425, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review.  The Applicant designated the Veterans of Foreign Wars as the representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he 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 030124.  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 PERFORMANCE AND CONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-154 (formerly 3630200).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  I signed the separation papers because the Lieutenant of the recruit board told me I would be able to come back after six months.  But to my astonishment, I was shocked to be given an entry code of RE-4 and placed in the dormitory of people who had tested positive for drugs, they were all shocked, they dept asking me the they were surprised, and that I was just unjustly being sent there.  And I had reached my 7th week just 1 week more to Battle Station.  I could not believe it.  They gauged me not to talk to my collegues (shipments) and they turn around to say I don't mix.  The only problem I had was that of my swimming, which was caused by the commander’s decisions not to let me go.  Constantly, I gave every thing to the Navy.  It was my dream because of my wide knowledge of military armaments and weaponries, covering U.S. Russian, China, French, Britain, NATO and Warsaw pact.

2.  I received the letter from the department of the navy & the issues I want you to look into: why did my commanders refused to allow me mix or talk freely with my shipmates as my other's shipmates did.  Why did my commander send me to I.T when he knew that I had a doctor slip not allowing me to work?  They were I an mol when I even top my division and gave them their first flag.  I felt I was discriminated at the boot camp at Great Lakes. 

Submitted by the VFW:

3.  We support the Applicant contention that his discharge be upgraded.  We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the Applicant's discharge be reviewed for upgrade 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 (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	010406 - 010429	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010430		Date of Discharge:  010727

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  02  28
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  33			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12+		AFQT:  ASVAB Scores contained in record.

Highest Rate:  SR

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

*No Marks Found in service record.

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNCHARACTERIZED/ENTRY LEVEL PERFORMANCE AND CONDUCT; authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-154 (formerly 3630200).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

010706:	Recruit Mental Health, Naval Hospital Great Lakes, IL:  
DIAGNOSIS:  Axis I:  V71.09 No diagnosis Offered on Axis I V62.2 Occupational Problem.  Axis II:  V71.09 No Diagnosis Offered on Axis II.
RECOMMENDATION:  Return to Duty.

010717:	Recruit Evaluation Report for Board Referral:  All resources have been exhausted in attempts to bring this Recruit to minimum standards.  He has violated page 13, been disruptive and claimed he was either discriminated against or picked on when he is at fault.  Far too much time has been spent on his Recruit and he has only to turned down assistance from all available sources.  THIS SR NEEDS TO GO HOME!  (Signed by Company Commander)  The best that this Recruit has to offer is not good enough for our Navy.  If he cannot catch on here in this structured environment then what will happen when all his responsibilities lay on his shoulders.  He is a hazard & will be a burden wherever he's assigned.  (Signed by Division Officer) 

010718:	Recruit Evaluation Board's Impression and Recommendations:  This recruit does not meet the Navy's minimum standards, and continues to make the same mistakes.  He will not do well in a structured environment.  Recommend ELS (Entry Level Separation).

010719:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of entry level performance and conduct as evidenced by failure to adapt to the naval environment.  Advised least favorable characterization of service would be general (under honorable conditions).

010719:	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.

010724:	CO, RTC, Great Lakes directed the Applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized discharge by reason of entry level performance and conduct as evidenced by failure to adapt to the naval environment.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 010727 with an uncharacterized service by reason of entry-level performance and conduct (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).

Issue1:  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.

Issue 2:  The Board’s charter limits its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s entry-level separation proper and equitable.  The Board found the Applicant’s discharge characterization appropriate.  The Applicant was processed for an entry-level separation based upon his inability to meet the Navy’s minimum standards.  The descriptive criteria associated with the Separation Code, Block 26 of the DD Form 214, in the Applicant’s case JGA (Entry Level Performance and Conduct), indicates the Applicant’s inability and failure to adapt to the military during the first 180 days of his active military service.  This clearly reflects the reason and the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge.  To change his discharge to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

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 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 25 Jan 01 until Present, Article 1910-154 (Previously 3630200), Separation by Reason of Entry Level Performance and Conduct.

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