DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 N A V Y A N N E X
WASHINGTON DC 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 8686-02
14 October 2003
From :
To:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
Sub j :
Ref:
(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl :
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) Subject's naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this
Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected
to show a more favorable type of discharge than the general
discharge issued on 6 April 2001. Additionally, he requests that
his RE-4 reenlistment code be changed.
, consisting of Messrs.
eviewed ~etitioner's allegations of error and
and
10 September 2003 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as
follows:
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
c. petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 8 December
1995. He enlisted in the Navy on 29 December 1998 for four
years, and subsequently extended that enlistment for 12 months.
The record reflects that up until the events that resulted in
separation, Petitioner served satisfactorily. At that time, he
was serving as a contructionman (SWCN; E-3), but had been frocked
to petty officer third class (SW3; E-4). Petitioner has
submitted copies of the two enlisted evaluations he received
after enlisting in the Navy, both of which assigned satisfactory
marks and recommended him for advancement and retention.
d. On 18 January 2001 the Navy Personnel Command informed
Petitioner's command that he had failed to disclose a warrant for
his arrest that was issued on 25 August 1995.
e. On 21 February 2001 the commanding officer directed
Petitioner's separation based on concealment of preservice civil
involvement. On 6 April 2001 he received a general discharge by
reason of fraudulent enlistment. At that time, he was assigned a
reenlistment code of RE-4.
f. With his application, petitioner submitted a letter from
the Assistant State's Attorney of Jackson County, Illinois, that
states, in effect, that the warrant was issued for another
individual with Petitioner's name, but with a different date of
birth. In his application, Petitioner claims that he knew
nothing about the warrant.
g. An advisory opinion from the Navy Personnel Command, dated
9 December 2002, states that Petitioner was discharged on
erroneous information and should be granted full relief.
h. An individual may be separated by reason of fraudulent
enlistment if there is a false representation or deliberate
concealment of a disqualifying factor. An individual separated
for this reason receives either a general discharge or a
discharge under honorable conditions. An RE-4 reenlistment code
is required under such circumstances. An individual may be
separated by best interest of the service, with an honorable or
general discharge, if separation is appropriate but no other
reason covers the situation at hand. Individuals separated for
this reason may receive a reenlistment code of RE-R1, RE-1, or
RE-4.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants relief. In
this regard, the Board believes that the reason for Petitioner's
discharge should be changed to best interest of the service since
he was unaware of the warrant for his arrest and the warrant was
for another person. Further, given his excellent performance of
duty and satisfactory marks, he should receive an honorable
discharge. Finally, the RE-4 reenlistment code appears to be
unjust given his overall record and since he did not fraudulently
enlist. Accordingly, the reenlistment code should be changed to
RE-1.
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an
injustice warranting the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on
6 April 2001 he was issued an honorable discharge by reason of
best interest of the service with an RE-1 reenlistment code, vice
the general discharge by reason of fraudulent enlistment and RE-4
reenlistment code actually issued on that date.
b. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating
to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or completely
expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such entries or
material be added to the record in the future.
c. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's
naval record be returned to the Board, together with a copy of
this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file
maintained for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a
part of Petitioner's naval record.
4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
..,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
Acting Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correctio of
Naval Records (32 Code ,of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the N
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05143-03
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 5 April 2001. c. On 12 February 2001 a grand jury charged Petitioner with robbery and a warrant was issued for her arrest. Applicable directives authorize the assignment of either an RE-3E or RE-4 reenlistment code to an individual separated for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03524-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, changes in her reenlistment code and narrative reason for separation. An RE-4 reenlistment code must be issued to an individual An RE-3E separated by reason of fraudulent enlistment. However, it does not appear that she would have been enlisted had recruiting authorities known of the arrest warrant.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07154-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2002. Given your concealment of your preservice arrest Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is separation because of a fraudulent enlistment. 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 | CY2000 | 07679-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show a reason for discharge other than fraudulent enlistment. Accordingly, the Board recommends that Petitioner’s reason for separation be changed to erroneous enlistment instead of fraudulent enlistment. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02020-03
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 17 March 1999. that his naval record be reviewed Petitioner's Mr.- Mr..* and Ms. 2. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he received a...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900621
The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, and Discharge Process, 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 otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05388-07
The Board, consisting of Ms. ie... Wie, 205 Mr. WIR reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 16 January 2008, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. On 15 September 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of fraudulent enlistment. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he received an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04272-04
h. Petitioner states he was told that if the charges were 2 dismissed, he could return to the Marine Corps. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reason for the change in the reason for discharge. c. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06943-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting to change the reason for separation "Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service" and RE-4 reenlistment code that was issued on 9 July 2007. Specifically, the Board finds that Petitioner disclosed her history of counseling during the enlistment processing as evidenced by her physical examination and subsequent psychiatric evaluation that was completed at the...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601112
Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: NOT FOUND IN RECORDDate Notified:Reason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Administrative Board Date: NOT FOUND IN RECORDCommanding Officer Recommendation (date): NOT FOUND IN RECORDDischarge directed by (date):NOT FOUND IN RECORD Reason...