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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND04-01105

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040628.  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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041122.  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 of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNCHARACTERIZED (Entry Level Separation)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  My discharge was inequitable because it was based on actions and/or behavior of the recruiting officer, and not solely on my behavior and/or actions while enlisted in the U.S.  Navy.
2.  The narrative reason for separation as listed on the discharge certificate is erroneous entry” (other).  I feel this implies a negative action taken on my part, and this was not/is not the case.  The recruiting officer submitted false documentation in order to support certain enlistment qualifications, without my prior knowledge or permission.
3.  An official investigation into this matter was executed, which ultimately resulted in the dishonorable discharge of the recruiting officer.
4.  At this time, I am applying for a position with local Law enforcement.  They will not consider my application with anything less than an honorable discharge.  I have completed all other aspects of the application process, and this is the only matter keeping me from entering their July academy.  I should not be penalized for the actions of someone else.  At the time that I enlisted in the Navy, I was still a minor, and very impressionable.  I made the mistake of trusting someone unworthy of my trust, and even now when I am trying to make good sound career choices, this mistake continues to affect my ability to provide a promising future for myself, and my daughter.
5.  In retrospect, my entire stint in the military lasted only 55 days, almost five years ago, however, I continue to face the consequences of someone else’s bad choice.  I am now 23 years old, a college graduate, and father.  In the opinion of many, including other service members, it is unethical to continue to hold me back.  At seventeen I volunteered to join the U.S.  Navy hoping to make a difference but, I was deprived of the opportunity to serve my country.  It would be a travesty to deprive me of the opportunity to serve my community as well.
6.  Lastly, when approached with the information that a falsification had occurred, I readily admitted that I in fact did not possess a High School diploma.  It is now my understanding that one had been purchased for me without my consent.  I made my amends by leaving the Navy, please allow me to put this behind me.
7.  You should find extensive investigative material on this matter; I was recruited in February/April of 1999, in Richmond, VA.  Further research will prove that an Honorable discharge is due, if not deserved.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Ltr frm Applicant dtd 041112
Associate’s Certificate dtd June 2004
ECPI Transcript dtd 16 Sep 04

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	990326 - 990331	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990401		Date of Discharge:  990525

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  01  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

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

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

UNCHARACTERIZED (Entry Level Separation)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990510:	Medical Evaluation: 
	AXIS I:  Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Conduct (threat of self-harm to effect military discharge)
	AXIS II:  No diagnosis.  
	Recommend entry level separation because of the disqualifying condition(s).  This SR is not suitable for continued training given the above diagnosis(es) and is at further risk if retained.

990512:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for uncharacterized (entry level separation) discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability as evidenced by his adjustment disorder.

990512:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

990520:	Commanding Officer directed the Applicant's uncharacterized (entry level separation) discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990525 with an uncharacterized service for convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability. (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).

Issues 1, 6, 7.  The Applicant states, “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on actions and/or behavior of the recruiting officer, and not solely on my behavior and/or actions while enlisted in the U.S. Navy.”  The Applicant was discharged for a condition not a disability as a result of his diagnosis by competent medical authority.  The documentation and statements provided by the Applicant were not sufficient to overturn the presumption that the Applicant was properly diagnosed with an adjustment disorder on 19990510.  The evidence reviewed did not persuade the Board that this diagnosis and subsequent administrative separation was improper or inequitable.  Relief denied.

By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given characterization of service "Uncharacterized" or entry-level separation 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 two months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to "honorable."  Relief denied.

Issues 2 & 3.  The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  The summary of service clearly documents that a condition not a disability (adjustment disorder) was the reason the applicant was discharged.  No other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the applicant was discharged.  To change the Narrative Reason for Separation would be inappropriate.

Issues 4 & 5.  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  The Applicant should be aware that, with respect to nonservice-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, educational pursuits, and especially civilian employment, an uncharacterized separation is considered the equivalent of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  Relief denied.  

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  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.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  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.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 24, effective
20 May 99 until 27 Aug 01, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200), SEPARATION BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONS.

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