Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201366
Original file (ND1201366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ET3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120607
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)        20000925 - 20001017     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20001018     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20051206      Highest Rank/Rate: ET3
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 19 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.86

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20040916 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:


S CM :            SPCM:            C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20041026 :       Extracted from CO letter dated 200 5 1 2 02

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 he had no pre-service convictions, and his recruiter did not disclose information he had given him.
2 .        The Applicant contends while filling out the new security clearance forms, his chief told him not to worry about his bankruptcy , and if the question about “ever being accused of a crime” was not on his enlistment form , then he would be fine.
Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0403             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 discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) . Based on the Applicant ’s failure to disclose criminal conduct during his induction into the U.S. Navy , command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Mar tial Convening Authority review .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his recruiter chose not to disclose the information he had given him. The Applicant further contends he had no pre-service conviction s , that both accusations were dropped, and the judge informed him that these instances would not show up on his record. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the recruiter failed to disclose pertinent information during the recruitment process. Regardless , the service record clearly shows the Applicant’s willful disregard to disclose pertinent information on his Standard Form 86 dated 18 September 2000 . The NDRB determined the Applicant actively participated in the false represent ation and/or deliberate conceal ment of his pre-service legal issue s. Therefore, the NDRB found the Applicant’s separation and characterization of service were warranted. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends while filling out the new security clearance forms, his chief told him not to worry about his bankruptcy and if the question about “ever being accused of a crime” was not on his enlistment form then he would be fine. Per the Commander, Navy Personnel Command letter dated 22 September 2005, the Applicant failed to disclose criminal conduct on his S tandard F orm 86 and makes no mention of the Applicant’s bankruptcy. Besides the Applicant’s personal statement on his DD Form 293, there is no other mention of the Applicant’s bankruptcy in the record. Further, the Applicant’s contention that he was told that he would be fine if the question about “ever being accused of a crime” was not on his enlistment form is irrelevant since it was in fact asked during his enlistment process. The Applicant’s Standard Form 86 signed and dated 1 8 September 2000 clearly shows the Applicant denied ever having been arrested , charged, or convicted of any offense(s). T he NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity and determined the Applicant’s separation for fraudulent entry was appropriate. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, 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 for additional information.


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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100132

    Original file (ND1100132.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/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100425

    Original file (MD1100425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In reviewing the Applicant’s records, the NDRB determined that the Applicant was afforded all of his rights, that the separation action was in accordance with the MARCORSEPMAN, and that the action was proper; therefore, the NDRB determined that no relief is warranted based on matters of propriety.Equity - The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. The NDRB reviewed all of the available records, supporting documents, facts...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800718

    Original file (ND0800718.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s service record is marred by an award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) and Article 134 (Adultery); thus substantiating the misconduct (commission of a serious offense) for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00800

    Original file (ND02-00800.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was then discharged out of the Navy with a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. Accordingly, he is permanently decertified from the PRP.”970502: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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...

  • 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 | ND0900145

    Original file (ND0900145.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 his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500960

    Original file (ND1500960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Separating Authority approved the Administrative Board’s recommendation to separate the Applicant and directed the Applicant be separated with Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801723

    Original file (ND0801723.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade based on lack of due process 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500695

    Original file (ND1500695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000442

    Original file (MD1000442.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 medical history documentation and voluntary statements that clearly substantiate that he did not disclose pertinent information upon his enlistment into the Marine Corps. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...