Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00682
Original file (ND01-00682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-CTI3, USN
Docket No. ND01-00682

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010419, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, DRUG ABUSE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-134 (formerly 3630100).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues
1. To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to petition for an upgrade in my discharge from general under honorable conditions to honorable. I am requesting this upgrade because I feel that I served almost 2 years of honorable service in the United States Navy. My DD-214 reads Fraudulent Entry - Drug Abuse with an RE-4. Prior to my entry into military service my recruiter was aware that I used marijuana experimentally. He told em that he would not tell me not to put it down on my forms, but that I WAS trying to join the CT (cryptologic technician) community and that I would have to pass my security clearance. Going on this I did not enter the information and signed the forms, which he signed as a witness. I did this because at this point in my life I felt that I wanted to make a difference doing something that I knew how to do well, and what better way than serving my country. I was already fluent in 2 languages with working knowledge of several others before I enlisted in the military. When I entered boot camp I went along with the papers as we had filled them out, it was not until after boot camp and talking to the Special Security Officers at my first training base, finding out that anything that we withheld from our records should be told to them and put into our security folder. This was so that the security investigators would know that we were not withholding information and if anything came up our admission would be in our security folders. During my security interview the question of drug use came up and I told the officer that I divulged the information, which he found when looking in my security records. I explained to him that I did not tell about the experimental drug use for many reasons: 1) had I told the recruiters or anyone at boot camp I may have been asked to leave and be sent back home. My home is Baltimore City, Maryland and my neighborhood is not stranger to crime, drugs and people whose hopes are gone because they feel trapped by where they are. 2) The security officer in boot camp threatened to kick me out of the military when he saw how much debt I had. One of my reasons for joining the military was to have a steady job so that I could become debt free. In college before joining the military I was working 3 or 4 jobs and at the same time attempting to attend school full time. While in the military I felt a sense of belonging and many of my family members and friends noticed that I was truly happy there. Happy to be doing something with my life that is making a difference. I became involved in my command performing collateral duties such as honor guard, serving on committees such as the Command Assessment Team, working on Christmas parties or command moral functions and being leading seaman in charge of new arrivals to the base from boot camp. I also held positions such as assistant section yeoman, section yeoman, and squad leader. I even volunteered to tutor other DLI (Defense Language Institute) students in their language courses. I also became involved in the community by volunteering for community projects and joining a samba troupe. I also took classes at a local college working toward my bachelors degree and my associated degree in Chinese. When I moved off to Goodfellow Air Force Base I volunteered for funeral details, joint service color guard, and other base activities (Some even on weekends and during liberty time). I was married to the military with no expectations of leaving.
No longer in the military I still follow some of the customs. I always take my hat off when entering a building and honor colors. Some people even tell me that I still walk like I am marching. I still eat, drink, sleep and breathe the Navy. I had to divert my attention from a basketball game on television once because when I heard the "Star Spangled Banner" played. I thought of my times in the military and broke into tears. I felt a sense of belonging in the military and I felt that I was a great Asset to the CT community. I am still learning other languages and reinforcing those that I know, because I want to and love doing so, not because I am obligated by a contract to do so.
I would like an upgrade also because I was granted a security clearance on the knowledge of my experimental drug use and during my 2 and 1/2 years of military service all of my drug tests were negative. If given one at this moment the results would still be negative. I also applied to the NSA and my application was discontinued, maybe for the reasoning of my discharge. I fell that an upgrade of my discharge would give me my life back. I would be able to use the GI Bill to further my education and get my degree and hopefully become and interpreter or translator in the government.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Evaluation Report (Military) (2 evals)
Character Reference ltr, undated, from CTI1 M_ J. S_, USN
Character Reference ltr, undated, from CTI3 A_ L. Pope, USN
Defense Language Institute Certificate dated 17 Feb 2000
Linguistic Certification (Chinese-Mandarin Language) dtd 17 Feb 2000
 Air Force Certificate of Training (Apprentice Far-East Cryptologic Linguist Specialist (Chinese) Course dtd 19 Jul 2000
Defense Language Institute, Commandant's Award, Certificate dtd 17 Feb 2000
Defense Language Institute, Foreign Language Center Course Grades 02/14/2000
Letter of Appreciation from M_ K. B_, Feast of Lanterns Board dtd Aug 98
Certificate of Commendation, NAVSECGRU, DET, Monterey, (Color Guard/Cake Escort)
Letter of Appreciation, NAVSECGRU, DET, Monterey, Christmas Party dtd 14 Apr 99
Certificate of Appreciation, DLIFLC, Kendall Hall Learning Resource Center Tour Guide for Navy Detachment, dtd 13 Jul 1999

Certificate of Commendation, NavTechTrngCenDet, Goodfellow AFB, TX dtd 17 Jul 2000
PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     98027 - 980513 COG
                  USMCR(J)                 9501 - 9508      To accept ROTC Scholarship
                  USMCR            9508 - 9610      NROTC Student(Not verified)

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980514               Date of Discharge: 000925

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 04 12
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 14½               AFQT: 84

 Highest Rate: CTI3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.0 (1)     Behavior: 2.5 (2)                 OTA: 3.09 (5.0 evals)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

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

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

[ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD AND APPLICANT UNABLE TO PROVIDE.]
980210:  Questionnaire for Nation Security Positions (OMB No 3206-0007): Applicant marked "No" concerning use of illegal drugs and drug activity (pre-service use).

000922:  OIC, NTTC Det, Goodfellow AFB directed the applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into the military service, drug abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 000925 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into the military service, drug abuse (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).

Issue 1. The Board found no evidence that the discharge was inequitable or improper. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. The Board discerned no such error or injustice 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 relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. 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. Relief denied.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 until 2 Feb 01, 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 5420.174C 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600301

    Original file (ND0600301.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and attached letter: “ I would like to have my re-entry code changed to RE-1 so that I may have the opportunity to re-enlist.” “Dear Sirs: This is to correct my Navy record so that I may once again begin a military career. By regulation, members notified of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01154

    Original file (ND03-01154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “At Navy’s Discretion.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00307

    Original file (ND03-00307.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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; however due to an administrative error, the Applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects characterization of service as “General (Under Honorable Conditions) instead of “Entry Level Separation” and appropriate action will be taken to correct the error. In accordance with reference (b) (NAVOP...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501161

    Original file (ND0501161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-01161 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050708. I have let myself and the Navy down. The separation code “JDT”, fraudulent entry into military service, drug abuse, was substantiated by the Applicant’s statement to medical officers that he had used drugs prior to entry to active duty after having denied any pre-service drug use during the enlistment and induction process.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00084

    Original file (ND01-00084.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    860XXX: St. Clare's Hospital provided clinical information from applicant's medical records prior to entry into the Naval Service. I have included several references to my accomplishments in item 7 above (Supporting Documents).” The NDRB reviewed the applicant’s service record and post service documentation and found relief is not warranted.The applicant’s fifth issue states: “I have never been in any trouble with an criminal justice system.” The Board did not find this issue reason to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00443

    Original file (ND00-00443.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990129 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry (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 but inequitable (C and D).The Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00782

    Original file (ND99-00782.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 Letter from applicant, dated April 7, 1999. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :980403: Letter of intent to deny eligibility for a security clearance. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01175

    Original file (ND02-01175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-CTM3, USN Docket No. Recommend CTM3 M_ W_ (Applicant) be separated from military service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization based on fraudulent enlistment." The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.

  • 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00155

    Original file (ND00-00155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 that the applicant only admitted to foot problems (les planus) on his Report of Medical Examination upon entry into the service. In the applicant’s issue 2, the applicant states “my discharge did not match,...