Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800569
Original file (ND0800569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 200080124
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: ERRONEOUS ENTRY (OTHER)
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3620280 (ERRONEOUS ENTRY)

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19990602 – 199906 03              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19990603      Period of enlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 19990901
Length of Service : 00 Yrs 02 Mths 29 D ys          Education Level:         Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 31
Highest Rank /Rate : E-3    Evaluation marks: Performance: NONE       Behavior: NONE    OTA:
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJPs :     S CMs :   SPCMs: 

C C :      

Retention Warnings: .

Medical Record:  19990809 CC: Assaulted another recruit. Recruit has about two months of active duty service ; he was referred for emergency psychiatric hospitalization after physically assaulting another recruit. Due to patient’s assaultive and self destructive impulses, he was admitted for further evaluation. Because of physical abuse, he was put in foster care before age 2 until age 8 when he was adopted by a family who beat him with a belt. At age 8 and 9 he had periods of explosive behavior wherein he would attack others, especially his younger brother. In his early adolescent years he developed periods of depression lasting up to two weeks. Plan - admit him to inpatient psychiatric unit due to longstanding psychiatric problems. Strongly recommend separation due to the severity of his personality disorder and bipolar mood disorder. His history of assaultiveness is longstanding and deeply ingrained and he is dangerous to those around him; should he develop a psychotic condition like his mother , he will likely require medication.

Types of Documents Submitted

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:             From Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)




Applicant’s Issues

 1. Wrongfully discharged for erroneous enlistment

Decision

Date: 20 08 0430             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall ERRONEOUS ENTRY (OTHER) .
Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ). The Applicant contends he was wrongfully discharged for erroneous enlistment due to Bipolar disorder and he had no symptoms of Bipolar prior to his enlistment in the military.

During Board reviews the government is presumed to conduct its affairs with regularity unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for a discharge if such a change is warranted. A member may be separated on the basis of erroneous enlistment when the enlistment would not have occurred if relevant facts had been known by Navy Department or had appropriate directives been followed, the enlistment was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of member, and the defect is unchanged in any material respect.

The Applicant does not deny he was suffering from a personality disorder at the time of his discharge from Naval service. Only 2 -months after enlisting, h e was diagnosed, by a qualified military medical officer, as possessing a longstanding personality disorder and bipolar mood and was strongly recommend for separation due to the severity of his longstanding history of psychiatric problems , a ssaultive behavior and continuing risk to do harm to himself or others. The re is no evidence contained in the Applicant ’s record to reflect the Navy was made aware of this condition by the Applicant at the time of his enlistment. Furthermore , in the Report of Medical History the Applicant completed upon enlisting, he checked “no” in response to the question in section 11, “have you ever had or now have”- Depression or excessive worry. After his anger outburst and assault, t he Applicant made it clear to military medical professional s he had periods of depression, anger, explosive behavior during his adolescence. Clearly , if this information was made known to Navy officials at the time of his enlistment more scrutiny would have been applied to the Applicant’s medical in processing. As a result of the military medical doctor’s assessment, the command discharged the Applicant. The Applicant's DD Form 214, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, indicates he was separated for a Erroneous Entry (other) ; based on the fact he failed to bring to light his emotional past during his in-processing which otherwise would have precluded him from entering the service.

The Applicant should be aware b y 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 service member’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 3 months in the military prior to notification of separation to warrant a change of discharge to honorable . Therefore the Board determined his uncharacterized characterization appropriate and a change was not warranted .

The Applicant should be aware with respect to non - service-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.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found






Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 December 1997 until
12 June 2001, Article 1910-130, 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 II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : 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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000 . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: 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.
Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : 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.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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.
Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD . ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 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 may 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.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.

Board Membership: 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-01255

    Original file (ND99-01255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    with my DD-214, there are no records that substantiate the reasons for my separation from the United States Navy, with a separation code of RE4.” The NDRB found the applicant was diagnosed by a medical officer with a personality disorder on 970310 and properly discharged from the Naval Service. Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00650

    Original file (ND99-00650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970821 with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found this to be a non-decisional issue. You...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01042

    Original file (ND00-01042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. I was notified in July that my newborn son was having medical problems, I requested to call home and was granted permission. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990802 with an entry level separation (uncharacterized) for defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment - alcohol abuse(A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500672

    Original file (ND0500672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“I would like to change my RE-4 discharge to a discharge where I may reenlist in the service. Plan and Recommendation: Entry level separation due to disqualifying psychiatric condition affecting servicemember’s potential for performance of expected duties and responsibilities while on active duty.011004: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401531

    Original file (ND1401531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801156

    Original file (MD0801156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: or UNCHARACTERIZEDNarrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19991208 - 19991228Active:19991229 - 20031003 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20031004Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20061123Length of Service: Years Month20 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT:38MOS: 0431Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions):()/()Awards and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00737

    Original file (MD00-00737.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00737 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000517, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. As Bipolar disorder is a developmental condition duty in the USMC only aggravated a pre-existing condition. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00483

    Original file (ND03-00483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to Entry Level Separation. My reason for separation be changed to “entry level separation.”” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Supplemental statement of Applicant provided by civilian counsel,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00781

    Original file (ND02-00781.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00781 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020509, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I was diagnosed with an Anti-Social Disorder which specifically states there must be a pervasive pattern or disregard for and violation of the rights of others, occurring since age fifteen years as indicated by three or more of the following (1) Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02481

    Original file (BC-2006-02481.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was disability discharged with severance pay with a 20% disability rating (30% less 10% Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) factor) on April 7, 1983 for Bipolar Disorder. The orthomolecular psychiatrist in a letter dated November 5, 1980 supported the applicant’s entry into military service, with a caveat that he hadn’t seen the applicant in over two years. BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR RALPH J. PRETE Chief Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military...