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

 
ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND03-01224

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030710.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to uncharacterized or unqualified.  The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20040514.  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.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain:  UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/ERRONEOUS ENTRY - ALCOHOL ABUSE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly 3620280).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “My discharge is inequitable due to the stigma attached to the type and reason for discharge and the diagnosis method used to determine the type and reason for the discharge.  The reasons for my belief of inequity are as follows:

The information leading to my evaluation and discharge was brought to light during MOT.  During that procedure recruits are lead to believe they will be sent to prison for any infraction or omission.  Although this does bring out important information it also puts recruits in a frame of mind that makes it hard to understand the situation or make valid statements in response to questions.

Realizing that I had not been totally truthful during my recruitment, I was very nervous and unable to respond properly during the interview.  This was compounded by a refusal by the interviewing official to clarify questions I did not fully understand.  There was also no allowance for clarification of responses on my part.
The questions about substance abuse and dependency were referenced to a 3 year period.  I had a lot of trouble coping with the situation during my departure deferral period.  This time was approximately 8 months and that is the time frame my responses were based on.  I was not allowed to explain this and when I asked about it the questions were merely repeated.

I realize that the diagnosis and basis for my discharge were based on my responses.  However since separation I have been evaluated by and am seeing a Psychologist.  As evidenced by his report I am not, nor HAVE A TENDENCY toward, substance dependency.  I have some problems I am working through but I do not suffer from Borderline Personality Disorder.

The type and reason for this discharge have already caused problems for me when applying for jobs.  It is a stigma that will follow me throughout my life unless I am dishonest about it.

I very much would like to serve in the Armed Forces of our country.   With this discharge as it stands, no matter what the out come of my work with Dr B_, I will be precluded from enlisting in any branch.

I therefore request three areas of change on my discharge.
1.  I request that the type of discharge be changed to Honorable because I was honest when asked and was not charged or convicted of any crime.
2.  I request that the narrative reason be changed to uncharacterized, unqualified or something less ominous than erroneous entry - alcohol abuse.
3.  I request that the reentry code be changed to a level allowing enlistment in one of our armed services.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Psychological Evaluation, dated January 25, 2002
Privacy Act Consent Form, dated June 1, 2003
One page from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	010523 - 020102	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  020103		Date of Discharge:  020114

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  00  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  79

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*	Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No marks assigned.

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

UNCHARACTERIZED (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)/ERRONEOUS ENTRY - ALCOHOL ABUSE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-130 (formerly 3620280).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

020104:	Recruit Mental Health evaluation: Diagnosis: Axis I: Alcohol dependence, EPTS.  Axis II: Borderline personality disorder, EPTS.

020108:	Applicant was notified found to be alcohol dependent.

020108:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by alcohol dependence and borderline personality disorder.

020108:	Applicant advised of 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.

020109:	Commanding Officer directed discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment - alcohol abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020114 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment - alcohol abuse (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 was notified of the intent to discharge with a general
(under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to
erroneous enlistment as evidenced by alcohol dependence and borderline personality
disorder.  The Commanding Officer directed the discharge with an uncharacterized
service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment –
alcohol abuse. By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment
are given characterization of service "Uncharacterized" unless there were unusual
circumstances regarding performance or conduct, which would merit an "honorable" 
characterization.  Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances 
during his less than one month in the military to warrant a change of discharge to 
"honorable."  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The summary of service clearly documents that Erroneous Entry/Alcohol Abuse, was the reason the applicant was discharged.  No other Narrative Reason for Separation more clearly describes why the applicant was discharged.  To change the Narrative Reason for Separation would be inappropriate.  Relief based on this issue is not warranted.

Issue 3.  Concerning a change in reenlistment code, 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.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

The following is provided for the edification of the applicant.  There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded, based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.  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 33, effective 13 Jun 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, 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