Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03437-01
Original file (03437-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TRG
Docket No: 3437-01
30 August 2001

Dear Mr. Wood:

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 August 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.

Your allegations of error and

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 13 June 1996.
documents, you denied any preservice drug use or alcohol abuse.

On your pre-enlistment

i

On 10 September 1996, based largely on your statements, you were
diagnosed as alcohol and marijuana dependent and it was noted
In addition you were
that you were a poly-substance abuser.
diagnosed with an unspecified personality disorder with
social and obsessive compulsive traits.
recommended an inpatient treatment program to help you overcome
and separation from the Navy.
your alcohol and drug dependence,
On 17 September 1996 you acknowledged the foregoing diagnoses and
declined inpatient treatment.

 
The psychiatrist

anti-

On 24 September 1996 you were notified of separation processing
by reason of personality disorder, fraudulent enlistment,
erroneous enlistment and alcohol rehabilitation failure. In
you elected to waive your
connection with this processing,
the separation authority
procedural rights. Subsequently,
directed an entry level separation.
October 1996 by reason of fraudulent enlistment.
you acknowledged that you were not eligible for reenlistment and

You were so separated on 2
At that time,

would be assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
In support of your application you have submitted numerous
excellent character references from active and retired military
members and leaders of your community.
that you would be an outstanding member of the military and
recommended that your record be corrected to allow your
reenlistment.
until you discovered that your girlfriend needed assistance and
you decided to get out of the Navy.
then made false statements concerning your reactions to the
stress you were under, and your preservice drug and alcohol
abuse.
discharge were false, you did not fraudulently enlist in the
Navy. You now regret your actions and desire a change in the
reason for your separation and reenlistment code so you can
reenlist in the Navy.

You contend that since the statements you made to gain

They believe, in effect,

You state that you were doing well in training

You further state that you

It is well settled in the law that an individual who perpetrates
a fraud in order to be discharged should not benefit from that
fraud when it is discovered.
tell if you were untruthful in order to be discharged or are
being untruthful now.
The Board believed that whatever version
of events is true, you now have to bear the consequences of your
actions.
The Board concluded that the reason for your separation
and reenlistment code should not be changed.

In addition, the Board could not

Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

The names and

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken.
You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material   error or injustice.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 07727-11

    Original file (07727-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considere@a your -application on 2 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03279-01

    Original file (03279-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Concerning your abuse of alcohol you stated that It was also noted that you had previously been diagnosed The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 15 May 2000 at age 22. Based on the foregoing record, administrative separation by reason of fraudulent enlistment, a and alcohol abuse rehabilitation designated mental condition, Subsequently, the separation authority directed an failure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06911-07

    Original file (06911-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Once a code is correctly assigned it is not routinely changed or upgraded as a result of events that occur after separation or based on merely on the passage of time.4 Enclosure (6) is returned for final actionHead, Performance Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04110-02

    Original file (04110-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The evaluation resulted in On 16 August Based on your concealment of your drug and alcohol abuse history and psychiatric hospitalizations, you were processed for discharge by reason of fraudulent enlistment. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07021-00

    Original file (07021-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    on 14 December 1999. and admitted to using alcohol 650 times and marijuana 1900 times. Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is separated from Navy recruit training due to In addition such a code is assigned when an drug abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01830-99

    Original file (01830-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1830-99 13 August 1999 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To : Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF 0 Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record t I i 1. The regulation requires the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged by reason of "erroneous enlistment-alcohol abuse. l1 i. Petitioner states that he did not erroneously enlist nor does he have an alcohol problem.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07489-08

    Original file (07489-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The discharge authority directed an honorable discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a diagnosed personality disorder and on 17 November 1997 you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. It also considered your explanation for providing false...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500150

    Original file (MD0500150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to “ELS.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.Sincerely,R_ M_ G_ (Applicant) ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: DD Form 370 filed by H_ L. J_ Jr. DD...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04916-01

    Original file (04916-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A psychiatric evaluation in the record states that you were referred by the chaplain for depression, frequent crying, inability to adapt to military life, anger, anxiety, and problems with your family and girlfriend. facts alleged at the time including the alcohol abuse, breaking mirrors, and general unhappiness were fictional and designed to create a picture of distress. He appears have an understanding of the reality Clinical evidence However, pre- The Board noted that the diagnosed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08210-07

    Original file (08210-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2008. You were separated from the Navy with a bad conduct discharge on 31 January 1997. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.