Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00458
Original file (ND01-00458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USNR
Docket No. ND01-00458

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge 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 010817. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION/Fraudulent entry, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630100.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Statement from applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890807               Date of Discharge: 891006

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 01 14
         Inactive: 00 00 15

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: AR

 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):

ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION/Fraudulent entry, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630100.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890823:  Applicant ordered to active duty for 36 months under the Active Mariner Program.

890906:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL reports applicant's urine sample received 890828, tested positive for cocaine.
890912:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an Entry level separation by reason of Defective enlistment and Induction due to fraudulent entry as evidenced by failure to disclose pre-service drug use.
990915:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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.

990922:  Commanding officer recommended discharge with an Entry level separation by reason of Defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): AR (applicant) was screened and laboratory confirmed positive for cocaine on his accession urinalysis. He did not include the full extent of his preservice drug use on his enlistment documents. His enlistment and induction are fraudulent, and an Entry Level Separation is recommended.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 891006 with an Entry level separation by reason of Defective enlistment and Induction due to fraudulent entry (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).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. Relief denied.

 The following is provided for the benefit of the applicant. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide any of these documents. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 7/86, effective
16 Dec 86 until 19 Dec 93, Article 3630100, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENTS AND INDUCTIONS DUE TO FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO NAVAL SERVICE.

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 " afls10.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      


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00341

    Original file (ND01-00341.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board discerned no impropriety concerning the applicant’s enlistment. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective 22 Jul 94 until 02...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00517

    Original file (ND01-00517.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 870805 with an entry level separation by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry (A). Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 7/86, effective 16 Dec 86 until 19 Dec 93, Article 3630100, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENTS AND INDUCTIONS DUE TO FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO NAVAL SERVICE. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01071

    Original file (ND03-01071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :990312: USN Alcohol and Drug Abuse Screening Certificate (NAVCRUIT 1133/7): Applicant failed to disclose pre-service criminal activity, police record.990528: Commanding Officer, Recruit Training Command authorized Applicant’s discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry. By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given a service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00799

    Original file (ND01-00799.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 921110 with an under honorable conditions (general) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry (A). At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00946

    Original file (ND02-00946.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-OSSR, USNR Docket No. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 960605 with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry (A). 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00028

    Original file (ND04-00028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:I respectfully request my discharge categoration be changed in consideration of the following: Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of DD Form 215 Employment Confirmation Letter dated October 27, 2003 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00473

    Original file (ND04-00473.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current Un-Characterized discharge to that of Honorable.The FSM served on active service from July 15, 2003 to August 11, 2003 at which time he was discharged due to Fraudulent Entry...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00660

    Original file (ND03-00660.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00660 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20030304, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Convenience of the Government. On page two, item k, Separation Authority Action: it states my discharge should have been ‘characterized as General Under Honorable Conditions, based on fraudulent entry into the naval service.’ My DD-214 does not reflect the recommendation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00053

    Original file (ND04-00053.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am requesting that my RE-4 be changed to an RE-1 and that my Interservice Separation Code be changed from a 74 to 99, or another code that will allow me to get back in. Please change my DD 214 to allow me to serve my country with pride.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Ten pages from Applicant’s service/medical records Applicant’s statement, dated April 16, 2003 PART...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00195

    Original file (ND99-00195.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USA (2 years, 11 months 14 days)* Inactive: USA (1 month 6 days)* Inactive: USNR (DEP) 961016 - 961030 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 961031 Date of Discharge: 971010 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00...