Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001113
Original file (ND1001113.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100330
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:

Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20020327 - 20020422     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020423     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060421      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.6 ( 5 )      Behavior: 2.4 ( 5 )        OTA: 3.13

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Period of UA/ C ONF : 20021127-20021203 (6 days); 20030113-20030415 (60 days) /

NJP :

S CM :
- 20031021 :       Art icle (Unauthorized absence: 3 specifications totaling 66 days)
                  Specification 1: 20021127-20021203 (6 days)
                  Specification 2:
NFIR
                  Specification 3:
20030113-20030415 (60 days)
         Sentence :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         FRAUDULENT ENTRY
         20021127-20021203 (6) ; 20030113-20030415 (60)
        
The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.





Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related 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:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
        
From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 3 May 2005 until 16 May 2008, 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends his discharge is improper and that his record of service does not prove fraudulent entry.

Decision

Date: 20110512 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

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 evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included Summary Court-Martial (SCM) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence: 3 specifications totaling 66 days). Furthermore, the command received notification that the Applicant was being denied a security clearance. Without specific details, the NDRB opined that the Applicant failed to disclose pertinent information upon enlistment , which the command deemed as fraudulent. Based on the offenses committed and the circumstance s surrounding his denied security clearance , command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, but waived his rights to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority . The Applicant requested , via a conditional waiver , that he would forgo an administrative board if he was discharged from the Navy with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is improper and that his record of service does not prove fraudulent entry. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discovered there was no impropriety or inequity in the Applicant s assigned reason for discharge . The Applicant was notified by the Department of the Navy, Central Adjudication Facility (DONCAF) that they made a preliminary decision to deny him a security clearance. Although the specific reason is not known by the Board, the NDRB opined that the information was serious enough and most likely occurred prior to enlistment. The fact that the Applicant went in a UA status for 60 days justifies the General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs in the absence of persuasive evidence to th e contrary. As such, this NDRB determined that the Applicant’s discharge was regular in all respects and was warranted . 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 for separation shall remain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews and Post-Service Conduct .


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.

Employment/Educational Opportunities
: The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. 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 accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100365

    Original file (MD1100365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20020806 - 20021104Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20021105Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20021127Highest Rank: Length of Service: Years Months23 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:63MOS: 9900Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NONE / NONEFitness Reports: Awards...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901014

    Original file (ND0901014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a review of the evidence of record and statement submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined that there was sufficient evidence to support a discharge based on fraudulent enlistment. The Applicant also contends that an upgrade is justified based on the fact that he honorably served his country for 40months, excelled at his rating and received awards.Taking into consideration the Applicant’s overall record and hisconduct,which reflected his willful failure to meet the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700027

    Original file (ND0700027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-SN, USNND07-00027Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20061012Characterization of Service: Reason for Discharge: - due toDischarge Authority: MILPERSMAN1910-134Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: USS ENTERPRISE (CVN 65) HP: NORFOLK, VAApplicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: EARLY SEPARATION FOR EDUCATION Review Requested: Representation:Issues (as summarized by NDRB): 1. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500703

    Original file (ND1500703.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214Types 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:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700307

    Original file (ND0700307.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: “ FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ...

  • 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 | ND0901807

    Original file (ND0901807.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends she had disclosed her pre-service marijuana use to the military entrance medical doctors upon her entrance in the Navy, that the separation authority did not attempt to develop tangible evidence to show her enlistment was fraudulent or could be characterized as such, and that her command acted unfairly and misused their command authority and discretion when deciding to pursue her separation from the Navy.In the Applicant’s argument regarding Issue 2, she stated...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901426

    Original file (MD0901426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601056

    Original file (ND0601056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20030820: Commander, Naval Personnel Command advised Commanding Officer, USS Nimitz (CVN-68) of the Applicant’s failure to disclose criminal conduct and active warrants and directed the command to process member for fraudulent enlistment.20040330: Commanding Officer, USS Nimitz (CVN-68) notified the Applicant of his intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as General (under honorable conditions) by reason of Fraudulent Entry into Naval...