DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
CRS
Docket No: 8162-01
6 September 2002
Your allegations of error and
This is in reference to your application for reconsideration 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 Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 August 2002.
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.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 11 January 1995.
On 23 January 1995 the commanding officer directed your
separation based on your concealment of preservice civil
convictions.
separation by reason of erroneous enlistment (other).
time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
The Board noted that an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized by
regulatory guidance and often assigned to individuals who fail to
disclose required information prior to enlistment.
Further, the
code is normally assigned to individuals who fail to complete
initial training.
Even if some of the charges were expunged or
you were exonerated after your period of service, you were still
required to disclose them at the time of your enlistment.
The
Board noted your contention that you disclosed your pre-service
involvement to the recruiter prior to enlistment.
contention is not supported by the record, which contains a
statement to the effect that you told no one of your civil
involvement.
However, even if true, you were not discharged for
On 26 January 1995 you received an entry level
At that
This
This means
fraudulent enlistment but for erroneous enlistment.
only that had the Navy been aware of your involvement, you never
The Board thus concluded that there is
would have been enlisted.
Accordingly,
no error or injustice in your reenlistment code.
The names and votes of the
your application has been denied.
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02398-01
You were so discharged on 21 August 1987 and You did not The Board noted your contention that you have no Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment. However, the Board concluded that failure to disclose a civil conviction for rape provided sufficient justification to warrant a non-recommendation for reenlistment and assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02685-01
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. no differently than others discharged under similar circum- stances, the Board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code. 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 | 03570-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 18 October 2001, your separation was At that time, you were Since the Board found no evidence that RE-4 Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-3E or reenlistment code to an individual separated by reason...
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 | CY2010 | 05786-10
Based on the still pending civil charge, and the fact that you failed to disclose your previous civil involvement prior to enlisting in the Navy, you were processed for separation by reason of erroneous enlistment. The Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your reentry code which was correctly assigned under your circumstances. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05014-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this materi'al considered by the Board consisted Board. Based on these findings and your and a personality disorder with Additionally, you revealed The On 6 July 1999 you were notified that separation action was being initiated for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07645-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 January 2002. The Board found that you served in the Navy from 8 to 30 July 2000, when you were discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment and assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4. 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 | CY2001 | 01087-01
material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in considered your application on Documentary regulations and policies. You were so discharged on 27 November 1995 and assigned and waived the right to Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged by reason of erroneous...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03691-06
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 fo d the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 16 May 2002 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident.On 3 June...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02760-03
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. A review of the 2. reas administrative portion of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning being arrested and charged with domestic violence and assault, not being recommended for promotion, and not being recommended for reenlistment because of commission of a serious...