Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600459
Original file (ND0600459.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00459

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060208. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 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 20061214 . 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 by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment .



PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Decisional Issues

No decisional issues were submitted by the Applicant.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
 2005-2006 Institutional Student Information Record , d a t e d August 9, 2005
Letter from Northern Main Community College , dated December 30, 2005
Travel Certificate , dated June 2, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20021025 - 20030506       COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20030507              Date of Discharge: 20030604

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 00 00 28
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 1 7 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted : 4 ( 12 -month extension)

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 44

Highest Rate: AR

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 Applicable


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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

030523:  Recruit Mental Health evaluation by P_ S_, PHD, Psychology Staff: It was determined that SR (Applicant) has the following symptoms of an Oppositional Defiant Disorder, manifested by negativistic, hostile, and defiant behavior, lasting at least 6 months which has caused significant impairment in academic, occupational or social functioning as evidence d by:
         1. Often loses temper, 2. Often argues with adults, 3. Often actively defies or refuses to comply with adults requests or rules, 4. Is often touchy or easily annoyed by others, 5. Is often angry and resentful, 6. Is often spiteful or vindictive .
         Diagnosis:
          AXIS I:  Oppositional defiant disorder, 313.81, EPTE
          AXIS II:         No diagnosis on AXIS II
         Plan and Recommendation:
         1. Entry level separation due to disqualifying psychiatric condition affecting SR’s potential for performance of expected duties and responsibilities while on active duty.
         2. SR was educated regarding this condition and encouraged to seek treatment following separation. SR is suitable to report to Separation s Division.
030528 :  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by oppositional defiant disorder.

030528 :  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights .

030529 :  Commanding Officer, Recruit Training Command, directed the Applicant’s uncharacterized discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evi denced by an oppositional defiant disorder. Commanding Officer’s comments: “ As evidenced by the listed enclosures, and erroneous enlistment has occurred. ”


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20030604 by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (A) with a service characterization of uncharacterized . 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).

By regulation, members notified of intended recommendation for discharge within the first 180 days of enlistment are eligible for an uncharacterized or entry-level separation characterization of service. Unless there were unusual circumstances regarding a servicemember’s performance or conduct that would merit an honorable characterization, an uncharacterized discharge is generally considered the most appropriate characterization of a member’s service. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than 1 month in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable. Relief is not warranted.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans’ benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Additionally, 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 of the propriety and equity of the discharge. Relief is not warranted. However, 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.

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until Present, Article 1910-130 (formerly 3620280), SEPARATION BY REASON OF DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENTS AND INDUCTIONS - ERRONEOUS ENLISTMENT.
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 .
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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00758

    Original file (ND02-00758.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00758 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020506, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to Best Interest of Service (Secretarial Authority) and that a recommendation be made to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to change the reenlistment code to RE-1. 000811: Commanding Officer, RTC Great Lakes, directed Applicant's discharge with an uncharacterized service (entry level separation) by reason of defective enlistment and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500544

    Original file (ND0500544.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommendation: Entry level separation due to disqualifying psychiatric condition affecting Applicant’s potential for performance of expected duties and responsibilities while on active duty.030515: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by oppositional defiant disorder and a passive-aggressive personality disorder. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01070

    Original file (ND03-01070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and a R-1-Rentry level. 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) 020718 - 020804 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 020805 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500806

    Original file (ND0500806.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his 25 days in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00756

    Original file (ND01-00756.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I think my discharge should be changed on the fact that I was young and irresponsible. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000208 with an Entry level separation (Uncharacterized) for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment - alcohol abuse (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00420

    Original file (ND00-00420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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). ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00324

    Original file (ND01-00324.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991230 with an Uncharacterized service for Defective enlistment and induction due to Erroneous enlistment (A). The Board determined, the medical exam was performed by competent medical authority and the applicant was diagnosed with dysthymic disorder. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501260

    Original file (ND0501260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Please ensure SR returns with Hardcard and RDC evaluation.020211: Recruit Mental Health, Administrative Separation Recommendation (Major Depressive Disorder). The summary of service clearly documents that erroneous entry was the reason the Applicant was discharged.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01206

    Original file (ND03-01206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “I ‘m greatly asking for review of my records, and to have my discharge changed to honorable. The Applicant’s service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than three months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to “honorable.” There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00028

    Original file (ND02-00028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000216 with an uncharacterized service for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment (A). 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 states: “My discharge is wrong because I've lied to the Navy that I was a transvestite and...