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

  ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00307

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20021211.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031121.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB; however due to an administrative error, the Applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects characterization of service as “General (Under Honorable Conditions) instead of “Entry Level Separation” and appropriate action will be taken to correct the error.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall remain, as corrected:  ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION/Fraudulent entry, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630100.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I had become Discouraged in my service to the USN during a time in my life where I was experiencing Undue Hardship in my personal and family life.  I held no resentment toward the USN – Rather I enjoyed my time in service, and learned much which I still incorporate in my daily life.

I am currently changing careers and would like to have either an Honorable or General – Honorable discharge reflected on my applications.  I would appreciate any consideration you could show me regarding this matter.”

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	911112 - 920630	COG
	Active:   USN 			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  920701		Date of Discharge:  921222

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  05  22
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  80

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.6 (1)	Behavior:  3.6 (1)		OTA:  3.6

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Fraudulent entry, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630100.  (Characterization of Service to be administratively corrected to read:  ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION.)

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

911111:	DoD National Agency Questionnaire (DD Form 398-2):  Applicant failed to disclose pre-service drug abuse.

921215:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry as evidenced by failure to reveal at the time of enlistment, a complete and accurate history of pre-service drug use.  Applicant advised if separation approved, the least favorable characterization of service authorized is your case is General.

921215:	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.  Applicant did not object to the separation.

930107:	Commanding Officer notified CHNAVPERS of Applicant’s discharge with an entry level separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry as evidenced by failure to reveal at the time of enlistment, a complete and accurate history of pre-service drug abuse.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim):  “On 4 December 1992, SA F_ (Applicant) revealed his pre-service drug abuse to the Naval Submarine School Legal Office.  He disclosed that he used LSD multiple times from 1989 to 1992, and tried marijuana once.  He failed to reveal pre-service drug usage at enlistment at boot camp, and upon application for a security clearance.  SA F_ (Applicant) has perpetrated a fraudulent enlistment and has been untruthful more than once; therefore, he has no potential for further useful naval service.  In accordance with reference (b) (NAVOP 013/87) SA F_ (Applicant) was administratively separated from the naval service on 22 December 1992 with a discharge characterized as Entry Level Separation.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19921222 with an under honorable conditions (general) (to be administratively corrected to Entry Level Separation) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry (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:  By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of services as “Entry Level Separation” unless there were unusual circumstances regarding performance of conduct which would merit an “honorable” characterization.  The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than six months in the military to warrant an upgrade.  Relief denied.  The Applicant should be aware that, with respect to nonservice-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, civilian employment, educational pursuits, etc., an uncharacterized separation shall be considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing career opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s 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 discharge proper and equitable.   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.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 7/86, effective 
16 Dec 86 until 19 Dec 93, Article 3630100, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENTS AND INDUCTIONS DUE TO FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO NAVAL SERVICE.

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