Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300602

Original file (ND1300602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20130130

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)        20070316 - 20070417     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070418     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070518      Highest Rank/Rate: SR
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 60
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A    OTA: N/A

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :     S CM :    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 (DRUG ABUSE) ”

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 wants his reentry (RE) code changed to enlist in the Army.
2.       The Applicant contends he lied about suicide ideations and marijuana use to get out of the Navy.
3.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants a change to his narrative reason for separation.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 1003             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 . T he 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 proprie ty. The Applicant’s record of service included a clinical psychiatrist ’s diagnosis for mixed personality disorder and cannabis dependence. The Applicant was interviewed by the Mental Health Unit at Nav al Hospital Great Lakes after he said he wanted to get out of the Navy and indicated that he would hurt himself. The Mental Health Unit recommended the Applicant be processed for administrative separation due to a disqualifying psychiatric condition. Based on the Mental Health Unit recommendation, t he Applicant’s command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant was not entitl ed to an administrative board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants his reentry (RE) code changed to enlist in the Army. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he lied about suicide ideations and marijuana use to get out of the Navy. On 30 April 2007, the Applicant self referred to the Mental Health Unit at Nav al Hospital Great Lakes. The Applicant stated he “cannot take it and just want ed to go home.” After interviewing the Applicant, a clinical psych iatrist diagnosed him as having a mixed personality disorder with antisocial traits and cannabis dependence. The psychiatrist recommended the Applicant be processed for administrative separation. The Applicant was discharged for F raudulent E ntry ( D rug A buse). The NDRB determined there was not enough evidence to support the Applicant’s contention that he lied to get out of service. 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. The Applicant’s statements alone do no t overcome the burden that the g overnment acted properly in his case, and his discharge for fraudulent entry was warranted. Relief denied.

Issue 3:         (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants a change to his narrative reason for separation. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded or changed based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct

paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable narrative reason for separation as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Uncharacterized for Fraudulent Entry (Drug Abuse). 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

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902082

Original file (MD0902082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Lied about his mental health history to hide his homosexuality.2. The NDRB considers post-service conduct to determine if the misconduct committed during active duty was indicative of the Applicant's character or an aberration, but post-service conduct applies to the characterization of the discharge and not the narrative reason for separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501153

Original file (MD1501153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant’s record of service included no 6105 counseling warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. ” 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.
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801650

Original file (MD0801650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Self-admission of a pre-existing condition is grounds for a fraudulent enlistment discharge.Despite the fact the Applicant is now recanting his admission, medical professionals at boot camp felt there was sufficient evidence to support his claim of alcohol dependency.The Applicant does not provide any additional documentation to support his claim that he was not alcohol dependent aside from his and his mother’s statements saying he lied. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002050

Original file (MD1002050.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 | 2014_Marine | MD1400213

Original file (MD1400213.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200630

Original file (ND1200630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000810

Original file (ND1000810.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks an upgrade in his discharge characterization and change in narrative reason for separation in order to reenlist in the United States Army. Rather, the NDRB examines the propriety and the equity of an Applicant’s discharge and is authorized to change the characterization of that service or the reason for discharge if factors of equity or...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800824

Original file (MD0800824.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY INTO MILITARY SERVICE.Discussion : (Equity) 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 did not provide any evidence or documentation to indicate the command acted contrary to established DoD or Marine Corps policies in the management and processing of his case. Based on the evidenc of record...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201938

Original file (ND1201938.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to:FALSE INFORMATION Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080529 - 20090607Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20090608Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090702Highest Rank/Rate:ARLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 25 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 44EvaluationMarks:Performance:NOBBehavior:NOBOTA: NOBAwards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901653

Original file (MD0901653.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB, by majority vote, determinedthe awarded characterization of service was warranted and that Fraudulent Entry into the Marine Corps is the appropriate narrative reason for separation.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300602

Similar Decisions