Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801618
Original file (ND0801618.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080327
Characterization of Service Received: (ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION)
Narrative Reason for Discharge: FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, (DRUG ABUSE)
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN (FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20070713 - 20071120              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20071121      Period of E nlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20071221
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 01 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 59
Highest Rank /Rate : FR     Evaluation M arks: Performance: NFIR       Behavior: NFIR    OTA: NFIR
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJPs :    

S CMs :   

SPCMs:  

C C :      

Retention Warnings: .

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 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:

         - Letter from Senator J. I. of Oklahoma, U. S. Senate dated 19 March 2008.
Other Documentation (Describe)



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Reenlistment code should be changed.
 2. Applicant was not paid.
3. Applicant passed entry physical.
4. Illegal drug use was not questioned.
5. Illegal drug use was not detected .


Decision

Date : 20080821             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE, (DRUG ABUSE) .
Discussion

 : 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 , specifically the paragraph concerning s regarding .

: The NDRB has no jurisdiction to investigate or correct errors in pay. T he Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraph concerning Additional Reviews regarding this Issue. The BCNR can review documentation provided by the Applicant and , if warranted, will contact the Defense Fina n ce and Accounting Service to make any necessary corrections to back pay .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to an upgrade because he passed his entry physical . The Board determined although the Applicant was found fit to enlist in June 2007 , the evidence of the record indicates his physical condition had deteriorated to the poin t he was not able to begin train ing upon arrival at recruit training in November 2007. The Board determined a change would be inappropriate.
: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to an upgrade because he was not questioned specifically about his ab use of Oxycontin. The record of evidence clearly refutes this conte ntion. The Applicant denied having ab use d any narcotics, hallucinogens /psychedelic drug s upon enlisting in June 2007 at the age of eighteen years old. This is documented on the Addendum to DD Form 1966/4, United States Navy Illicit Behavior Screening Certificate; specifically questions 1-3 where the Applicant initialed “No” to all three questions concerning the use of narcotics. Upon initial medical treatment for opiate withdrawal in November 2007 the Applicant admitted daily use of Oxycontin, a narcotic drug, since the age of seventeen. This statement indicates the Applicant fraudulently provided information to his recruiter and signed officially documents used during his enlistment process providing false information about his drug use and possible addiction to the narcotic Oxycontin. The Board determined a change would be inappropriate.
: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to an upgrade because his illegal use of Oxycontin was not detected by urinalysis. According to MILPERSMAN 1910-134, a fraudulent enlistment discharge is directed in cases of deliberate material misrepresentation, omiss ion, or concealment of drug abuse. As described above, the Applicant deliberately misrepresented his past ab use of Oxycontin in statements to his recruiter . The Board determined a change would be inappropriate.
After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 3 May 2005 until Present, Article 1910-134, Separation 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 or is referred to a court martial 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 other medical related reasons. 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001933

    Original file (MD1001933.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Decisional Issue: (Clemency/Equity) CLEMENCY NOT WARRANTED. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501310

    Original file (ND1501310.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service/Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation: From/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Therefore, the awarded...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900633

    Original file (ND0900633.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902321

    Original file (ND0902321.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/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/To Representation:From/ToCongress member:Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101118

    Original file (ND1101118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: NONE By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall.Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900454

    Original file (ND0900454.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900504

    Original file (ND0900504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB rejects the Applicant’s contention and determined the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable; a change to the narrative reason for discharge would be inappropriate.In response to the Applicant’s petition to upgrade her characterization of service, the Applicant should understand 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...

  • 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0902250

    Original file (ND0902250.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.