Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700448
Original file (ND0700448.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ABHAR, USN
ND07-00448
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070223   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630100

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Automatic upgrade o ne year post discharge
                          

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall remain .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE .

Date: 20 071101                                             Location: Washington D.C.

Discussion

 Issue ( ) 1: The Applicant is requesting an upgrade in the characterization of his discharge based on the passage of time (one year). 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. 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 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, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, as examples of verifiable documentation that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade .

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board noted that the Applicant was not notified that he was entitled to have a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review his proposed separation prior to discharge. The Board concluded that, in light of his misconduct and recommended characterization of service, the Applicant was not prejudiced by this procedural error. 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 C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Summary of Service

 Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19950330 - 19951120              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19951121      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 19961011
Length of Service : 00 Yrs 10 Mths 21 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 40          Highest Rank /Rate : ABHAA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 2.0 ( 2 )       Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )          OTA: 2.50
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL

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

 19960409:        Chief Of Naval Personnel informed Commanding Officer, USS SHREVEPORT (LPD-12) of applicant failure to claim full arrest record on DD 398-2 dated 19950330 and on the DD 1966 dated 19951121. The following arrests were unclaimed by member:
         19930717         Injury to personal property.
         19950523         Trespassing
         19950711         Speeding
          19950825         Failed to appear and again failed to appear on 19950921, case pending.
19960830:        Applicant declared a deserter .

 19960912 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 - Unauthorized absence ( 34 days/surrendered) ; Art. 91 - Insubordinate conduct towards a petty officer .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 437.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days) . FOP suspended for 1 month.

19960912 :        Retention Warning for unauthorized absence and insubordinate conduct towards a petty officer .
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       19961007
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19961007
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                                NOT ADVISED OF RIGHT

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDING OFFICER, USS SHREVEPORT (LPD 12) ( 19961009 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19961011

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 14, effective 3 Oct ober 19 96 until 11 Dec ember 19 97,
Article 3630100, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF DEFECTIVE ENLISTMENTS AND INDUCTIONS - FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO THE 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01319

    Original file (ND03-01319.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing, and also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 001030: UA from USS SHREVEPORT (LPD-12) 0630,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601195

    Original file (ND0601195.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.Regarding Applicant’s Issue 2 and 3, the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700673

    Original file (ND0700673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommendation: Continue support.19960911: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Coping skills group. Diagnosis: Not currently suicidal. 20000214: Medical Record: Reason for visit: Follow up psychology clinic, reports feeling better since starting Prozac.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700392

    Original file (ND0700392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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 errors on the original DD Form 214:,, should read: “ AR”,, should read: “ E1” “ FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801270

    Original file (ND0801270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant submitted evidence of education, employment, and several reference letters to support her contention of good post-service conduct. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00539

    Original file (ND02-00539.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00539 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020321, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500866

    Original file (ND0500866.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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 | 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800002

    Original file (ND0800002.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19961115 - 19970909 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19970910Period of enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge:19980521Length of Service: Yrs Mths12DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:18AFQT: unreadableHighest Rank/Rate:RMSREvaluation marks:Performance: NA Behavior:NA OTA: NA Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Types of Documents...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200045

    Original file (ND1200045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he did not fraudulently enlist, because when he enlisted he did not know that the child was his.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason...