DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
ELP
Docket No. 514-02
9 May 2002
Dear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
8 May 2002. Your allegations of error and 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.
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 12 April 2000 for four years at age
19. The record reflects that on the following day, you were
referred to the recruit mental health unit for evaluation. You
reported that you had been diagnosed with an attention
deficit/hyperactive disorder and were taking Ritalin through the
sixth grade, when you stopped taking the medication. You claimed
your grades dropped in high school due to involvement with drugs
and, between the ages of 15-19, you used marijuana 4-5 times a
week. The examining psychologist opined that you suffered from a
dysthymic disorder given reported symptoms of depressed or
irritable mood, poor appetite, insomnia, low energy, low self-
esteem, and poor concentration or difficulty making decisions.
You were diagnosed with dysthymic disorder, cannabis abuse, and
an oppositional-defiant disorder. An entry level separation was
recommended.
On 18 April 2000 you were notified that separation processing was
being initiated by reason of defective enlistment and induction
due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by the diagnosed
dysthymic and oppositional-defiant disorders. You were advised
of your procedural rights, declined to consult with legal counsel
or submit a statement in your own behalf, and waived the right to
have your case reviewed by the general court-martial convening
authority. On 19 April 2000 the discharge authority directed an
uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of erroneous
enlistment. You were so discharged on 24 April 2000.
Reglations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individual separated by reason erroneous enlistment. The
Board noted your statement that when you left for recruit
training, you were extremely worried about your mother, who was
undergoing chemotherapy had heart problems. You contend you were
unaware that you could have postponed your enlistment, and you
started attempting to go home during the "moment of truth"
interviews. You claim that you disregarded your ethics and lied,
but soon learned that lies would not be sufficient to get a
discharge. A shipmate told you that referral to the recruit
evaluation unit (REU) was your only "way out." You assert that
while in the REU you responded to questions in such a manner that
would result in discharge. The Board is not sympathetic to
individuals who obtain discharges through fraud. The Board found
it difficult to determine what your true statement is, the one
you are making now, or the one you made in recruit training to
extricate yourself from your commitment. It is well established
in law that an individual who perpetrates a fraud in order to be
discharged should not benefit from the fraud when it is later
discovered. The Board concluded that the reenlistment code was
proper and no change is warranted. Accordingly, your application
has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
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 m ~ n d 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 PFE IFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01040-10
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 found these factors were insufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code due to your diagnosed adjustment disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06873-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2 0 0 2 . 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00758
ND02-00758 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020506, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to Best Interest of Service (Secretarial Authority) and that a recommendation be made to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to change the reenlistment code to RE-1. 000811: Commanding Officer, RTC Great Lakes, directed Applicant's discharge with an uncharacterized service (entry level separation) by reason of defective enlistment and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10749-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07609-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2002. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Further, the Board could not tell if you The Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is separated by reason of erroneous enlistment and such a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02142-04
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. Applicable regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to an erroneous enlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09439-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2003. On 26 November 1999 you were notified of administrative separation action by reason of convenience of the government due to defective enlistment and induction and/or erroneous enlistment as evidenced by the diagnosed oppositional defiant disorder and alcohol dependency. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05577-98
1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the United States Navy filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his reenlistment code be changed. d. On 9 September 1996 Petitioner was notified of separation processing due to erroneous enlistment. RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that a. the narrative...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01863-01
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. You were so discharged on 15 May 2000 and assigned and waived the right to Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment. Since you have been treated no differently than others discharged under similar...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08550-01
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 Board found no evidence that the diagnosis of bipolar disorder was inco~rect. 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.