Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700392
Original file (ND0700392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AR, USN
ND07-00392
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20020206   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: FRAUDULENT ENTRY Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630100

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Re ason change :

Applicant’s Issues:       1. Request release of Medical Records.
                          

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE .
Date: 20 070818                                       Location: Washington D.C.       

Discussion

 Issue 1 : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding . This request may be made through the department of Veteran’s Affairs, service medical records center, P.O. Box 5020, St. Louis, Mo 63115-8950.

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and/or the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted. The Applicant’s service record documents the discovery of the Applicant’s undisclosed prior service criminal record . Th ese past activities were not disclosed during the Applicant’s enlistment process when he certified by signing the DD From 398-2 to be true and complete . The Applicant was subsequently properly administratively processed and discharged in accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 7/86, effective 16 Dec 86 until 19 Dec 93, Article 3630100 .

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence ( to include evidence submitted by the Applicant ) to rebut the presumption. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, m edical and s ervice record e ntries, d ischarge p rocess and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

 The ND RB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214 :

         , , should read: “ AR ”
         , , should read: “ E1 ”
          “ FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: 19920605 – 19921115 COG                  Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19 921116               Years Contracted : 2       Date of Discharge: 19930920
Length of Service : Active: 00 Yrs 10 Mths 05 D ys                            Lost Time :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 38          Highest Rank /Rate : AR
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 2.6                   Behavior: 2.6     OTA: 2.80 (1)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFESNE SERVICE MEDAL


Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 19921112 :        Retention Warning issued for failure to disclose and arrest on 19920904 for driving on a suspended license and failure to produce proof of insurance, served 10 days in jail and paid fine.

19921116:        Applicant to active duty for 2 years.
19930408:        Applicant reported to USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN-73).
19930524:        Applicant requests early release from active duty due to low pay. Request denied, not qualified .
19930528:        Background investigation reveals arrest for gambling, escape and giving false name, 19910820; court records document Applicant’s conviction on 19910807 for shoplifting and obstruction of an officer; court records document Applicant’s conviction on 19920123 for gambling and obstruction of and officer; records also reveal an arrest warrant was issued on 19920820 for the Applicant based on trespassing resulting in damage to property.

1993 0722:        Applicant admitted to USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN-73) Medical for suicidal intentions.

 1 993 0803:        Applicant admitted to USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN-73) Medical for suicidal intentions.
19930810:        Medical Record: Diagn osis: Personality disorder not otherwise specified with narcissistic and borderline features. Represents continuing high risk of harm to self and others. Fit for duty, unsuitable for retention. Recommendation: Expeditious administrative separation.

19930904:        Commanding Officer, USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN-73) comments and recommendation to BUPERS regarding the Applicant’s administrative separation due to fraudulent entry and personality disorder. “In June 1993 it was learned by investigative report that AR Menefee had fraudulently enlisted into the US Navy by failing to disclose prior criminal activity. Further, he failed to disclose prior arrests and charges on a DOD Form 398-2, which he certified by his signature upon enlisting. Report also disclosed that on 20 Aug 1992 a warrant was issued by Cobb County , Marietta, Georgia for criminal trespass (involving damag e to property) on 14 August 1992 , which is still active.” Recommend General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.


Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       19930812
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19930812
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         ( UNDATED )
          Administrative Board                       
        
Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 19930902 )
Separation Authority (date):     BUPERS ( 19930913 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19930920


Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

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

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


Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 7/86, effective 16 December 1986 until 19 December 1993, 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 5420.174D 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600387

    Original file (ND0600387.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was evaluated by LT Wright PA-C and myself today and was advised that since his condition existed prior to enlistment and he did not disclose the preexisting condition of migraine headaches prior to enlistment, that his enlistment was actually fraudulent or erroneous. A: Migraine headaches by history1. Follow up with SMO concerning disposition in Navy.020713: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as entry level...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601112

    Original file (ND0601112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: NOT FOUND IN RECORDDate Notified:Reason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Administrative Board Date: NOT FOUND IN RECORDCommanding Officer Recommendation (date): NOT FOUND IN RECORDDischarge directed by (date):NOT FOUND IN RECORD Reason...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600212

    Original file (ND0600212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ]050321: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of defective enlistments and inductions – fraudulent entry into naval service.050321: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to obtain copies of the documents used to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700448

    Original file (ND0700448.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ”...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500782

    Original file (ND0500782.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AR Z_ (Applicant) commenced two separate periods of unauthorized absence for 19 days and 29 days. T he Board thoroughly reviewed the Applicant's service records, to include the record of his separation proceedings, to determine if his discharge was equitable. The Applicant further contends that he was never in any trouble prior to his going UA and that he had a good service record, including awards, prior to this time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500602

    Original file (ND0500602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00726

    Original file (ND00-00726.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Plan: Consult MD, Antiacid, instruct Pt to bring medical record so he can be consult, return as necessary.990407: USS CARTER HALL Sick Call: 22 year old complains of abdominal pain off and on since January. When asked about a history of bowel disorders, applicant admitted a diagnosis of Crohn's disease and supported this with a letter from the Portsmouth Gastroenterology Diagnostic Center dated Feb 1, 1999.990505: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01076

    Original file (ND01-01076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020419. Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. The Board found that the applicant’s issue of being falsely accused of stealing a car was not pertinent to the offenses of desertion during the period of February-June 2000 or illegal drug use.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500242

    Original file (ND0500242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 930930: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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 Applicant’s service record is marred by award of...