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

 ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00420 

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000215, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed.  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 000807.  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)/ERRONEOUS ENTRY (OTHER), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280).

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 25, Separation Authority, should read:  “NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130” vice “3620280”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  I feel I was given a separation code of uncharacterized unjustly.  As noted on the notification procedure letter dated 23 Sep 98 (* see highlighted area).  I was told I would be given a General (under honorable conditions) on my discharge.  As I stated that I wished to enlist in the U.S. Army upon my return home.  During separation I was told that I would have no problem.  I again request a change from uncharacterized to general (under honorable conditions).

2.  My discharge is improper because the character of service & subsequent RE code was based on the fact the Navy states I had ADHAD - as documented on enclosed psychological evaluation dated 20 Oct 98.  I do not have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (314.01).  I did not have ADHAD upon enlistment & do not have it now.

3.  Pertaining to the RE code, again, I did imply that I wished to enlist in another branch of service & was told I would have no problem.  I would like to join the U.S. Army to serve my country.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Applicant's undtd letter to the Board 
COMNAVPERSCOM ltr to House Representative, J_ P. M_ dtd Nov 13, 1998 concerning the applicant
Applicant's Notification Procedure Letter from CO, RTC, GrLakes, dtd 23 Sep 98
Applicant's Recruit Mental Health Evaluation dtd Sep 22, 1998
Cression Psychological Services ltr of Oct 20, 1998 concerning Applicant
Congressional ltr from A_ S_ dtd Dec 7, 1998 to Chief of Legislative Affairs
Applicant's ltr to Senator S_ (3 pages)
COMNAVPERSCOM ltr to Senator A_ S_ dtd Dec 15, 1998 concerning Applicant
Senator S_ ltr of Nov 10, 1998 to Naval Legal Service Office Mid-Atlantic, Norfolk, concerning Applicant
Applicant's letter to the Board dtd Mar 3, 2000

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	980710 - 980812	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  980813		Date of Discharge:  980929

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  01  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  52

Highest Rate:  FR

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)/ERRONEOUS ENTRY (OTHER), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly Article 3620280).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980710:	Report of Medical Examination upon entry:  Applicant failed to disclose history of existing medical conditions - attention deficit/hyperactivity.

980922:	Medical evaluation (Recruit Mental Health):  19 year old, single Caucasian male SR was referred to REU on Sep 21, 98 by chaplain.  SR arrived at RTC on Aug 13, 1998 and was referred because SR reported problems coping with naval service.  SR reported that he felt "emotionally unstable".
	PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY:  SR reported that he was diagnosed with Attention - Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder at age 10.  He stated that he was briefly treated with Ritalin but was taken off of the medication because his mother reported that it made the SR "act like a zombie".  SR described anger control problems, chronic poor judgement and impulse control and hyperactivity.
	MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION:  Revealed an alert, oriented recruit.  SR's mood was dysphoric with appropriate affect.  Eye contact was fair.  Recent and remote memories were intact.  Speech was clear and coherent.  Verbalizations reflected average intellectual functioning.  There was not evidence of a formal through disorder or an organic brain syndrome.  SR's judgement and insight were fair.  SR denied current suicidal or homicidal ideation or intent.  SR's present risk for danger to self or others is low.
	SINCE ARRIVING ON ACTIVE DUTY:  SR has experienced depressed mood and feelings of hopelessness for several days.  SR reported that he has thought about harming himself in order to get out of the Navy.  SR reported that he is not motivated to be in the Navy and expressed his desire to go home.  He has been hyperactive and inappropriate and appes dazed in training.  Command evaluation documented good performance but RDC reported that the "SR loves to talk and move around".
	PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS:  AXIS I: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity, Disorder Combined Type, EPTE, 314.01;
	AXIS II:  No diagnosis, V71.09
	NRAM-SAC code:  191 Gey-Psych (Pre-Service),  NO SECOND CODE
	RECOMMENDATION:  1.  Entry level separation because of disqualifying psychiatric condition.  2.  SR encouraged to seek treatment for condition upon separation.  SR educated regarding this condition and given an after care referral.  SR suitable to report to Sep Div.

980923:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by an attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and that the least favorable characterization of service in your case is General (under honorable conditions).

980923:	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.

980924:	CO, RTC, Great Lakes, IL directed the applicant's discharge with an Entry Level Separation (uncharacterized service) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980929 with an Uncharacterized service (entry level separation) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant was discharged for Erroneous Entry with a discharge characterization of uncharacterized.  The applicant was only in the service for one month and 17 days and therefore received a discharge characterization of uncharacterized (entry level separation).  The applicant states in issue 1 that “I was told I would be given a General (under honorable conditions) on my discharge.”  The applicant acknowledged on his election of rights that the least favorable characterization of service is General (under honorable conditions).  The characterization that the applicant received was uncharacterized.  He was not in the service long enough to receive evaluations from which to base a characterization.  The applicant was discharged for erroneous entry, meaning he would not have been enlisted in the Navy if the relevant facts of his use of Ritalin and his condition of Attention Deficit Disorder had been known by the Navy Department.  This was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the member.  The Board cites the medical evaluation he received while in the service on 980922 wherein he reported he was diagnosed with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder at age 10 and was treated with Ritalin.  He reiterated this to a civilian psychologist after he was discharged from the Navy.  The applicant did not state this on his enlistment paperwork, specifically his SF 93, and therefore was properly discharged for erroneous entry.  

In response to the applicant’s issues 2 and 3, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit re-entry into the Naval Service or any other of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to re-enlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment.

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 "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