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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00184

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20051109.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests 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 20060912.  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 General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: 

“I J_ B_ (Applicant) am requesting a review of my discharge for, the following reasons I was discharged for fraudulent enlistment, general under honorable conditions.  I was discharged for not informing my navy recruiter that I seen a counselor as a child and also that I was taking Zoloft up until my enlistment.  I did in fact inform my recruiter of these issues, as well as my mother confirmed to the recruiter.  The recruiter neglected to file this information as well as the reason for counseling and the use of Zoloft which was for anger and depression while I was a teenager.  I had these issues when I was a teen only, probably because of immaturity.  Joining the U.S. Navy made me mature and gave me my military and self pride, which I will have for a lifetime.  The reason for discharge I feel are un-just.  Due to this, my life and law enforcement career has suffered.  I have worked for the Kansas Department of Corrections for almost 4 years, but I’m trying to get a career started in Kansas Highway Patrol or other law enforcement agencies, due to this type of discharge, they won’t even look at who I really am. They can’t see that in my time in the KDOC I have promoted quickly and never had a negative mark in my record.  I can promise you that I’m a person of high integrity and good character and this discharge type is unfair to my true character.”

Documentation

Only the service and medical records was reviewed.  The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20010119 - 20010128	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20010129		Date of Discharge:  20010831

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  02  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  none
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  19 

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  66

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:   NA*		Behavior:  NA*		OTA:  NA*

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  None.

* Not Available

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-134 (formerly 3630100).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

000114:	Report of Medical History upon entry:  Applicant failed to disclose existing medical conditions/problems, etc.

010117:	United States Navy Illicit Behavior Screening Certificate:  Applicant failed to disclose existing medical conditions/problems, etc.

010119:	Enlistment waiver approved for one Chart “C” (Battery).

010810:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of fraudulent enlistment by not disclosing previous use of medication due to depression, suicide gestures or mental health consultation prior to enlisting in the Navy.

010810:	Applicant advised of 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.

010813:	Office in Charge, Naval Technical Training Center Detachment Lackland, Lackland AFB, Texas recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of fraudulent entry into the naval service.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “SR B_ (Applicant) failed to disclose prior-service mental health treatment, use of medication for depression due to that treatment, and suicide gestures.  He wishes to be discharged from the Navy.  The most appropriate reason for separation is Fraudulent Enlistment, which is this case warrants a General Discharge (Under Honorable Conditions).”

010816:	GCMCA, Chief of Naval Air Training authorized the Applicant's discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of fraudulent entry into military service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010831 by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions).  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 (B and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).  

The Applicant states “I was discharged for not informing my Navy recruiter that I seen a counselor as a child and also that I was taking Zoloft up until my enlistment”.  The 
Applicant goes on to say “The recruiter neglected to file this information as well as the reason for counseling and the use of Zoloft which was for anger and depression while I was a teenager”.  The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs.  The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the recruiter misled him through the recruitment process.  The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.  Relief denied.  

The Applicant states “I’m trying to get a career started in Kansas Highway Patrol or other Law enforcement agencies, due to this type of discharge, they won’t even look at who I really am”.  The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  The NDRB is authorized 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, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service 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.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge.  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 32, effective 26 Apr 01 until 21 Aug 02, Article 1910-134 (previously 3630100), Separation by Reason of Defective Enlistments and Inductions - Fraudulent Entry Into the Naval Service.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023