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

ex-HM3, USN
Docket No. ND03-01394

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030821.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040922.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety was discovered, however an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was 3 to 2 that the character of the discharge shall change.  The discharge shall change to:  HONORABLE/Other physical/mental conditions - obesity, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I respectfully request that my discharge be upgraded from General/Under Honorable conditions to Honorable.  I was discharged due to “failed physical standards”, inability to run PFT in alotted time.  On 07OCT93, soon after failing the final PFT, I was diagnosed with asthma by M.A. Macy, M.D. LT, MC USNR at Arlington Branch Medical Clinic in Arlington, Va.  This explained my inability to complete the run portion of PFT in alotted time.  When my rights were explained to me, I was advised that I would still be able to take advantage of VA benefits.  Therefore, I did not challenge discharge nor seek medical board.  Most recently, I’d found that I couldn’t received GI Bill benifits unless my discharge was upgraded.  Thus, I request.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS):

2.  “Applicant indicated above requested that Veterans of Foreign Wars act as counsel concerning his application.  His records were reviewed on 09-09-04 and the following comments are hereby submitted.

We support the applicant’s contentions 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 review for an upgraded discharge.”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 4 Oct 1993
Copy of DD Form 214
Letter from Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, dated 15 Sep 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	881122 - 890604	COG
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  890605		Date of Discharge:  940215

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  08  11
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (24 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  78

Highest Rate:  HM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.0 (4)	Behavior:  4.0 (4)		OTA:  3.9

Military Decorations:  NAM

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  GCM, NUC, MUC, SWAS w/Bronze Star, SSDR, CAR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Other physical/mental conditions - obesity, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

931007	Medical Examination:  Applicant complained of difficulty breathing in exercising, diagnosed as possible exercise induced asthma.

940215:	Applicant not eligible for reenlistment due to Failed Physical Standards, not recommended for reenlistment and assigned a restrictive reenlistment code of RE-4.  

940215:	Applicant discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge by reason of Failed Physical Standards.

Complete Discharge Package Unavailable

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940215 under honorable conditions (general) for convenience of the government by reason failed physical standards (A and B).  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this, the Board found that the discharge was proper, but inequitable (C and D).  

Issues 1 and 2:  The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should have been the “type warranted by service record.”  A review of Applicant’s records indicated an honorable discharge was warranted.  Applicant’s performance and behavior marks were above the standard required for an honorable discharge and there was no adverse information that would have warranted any other characterization of his service.  Therefore, relief to the character of service is granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

B.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3620260, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL AT THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THE BASIS OF FAILURE TO MEET THE PHYSICAL READINESS STANDARDS (OBESITY/PHYSICAL READINESS TEST (PRT) FAILURE)

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