Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11662-09
Original file (11662-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX REC

WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 Docket No: 1131662-09
12 August 2010

 

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 11 August 2010. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

1 February 1967, at age 21. In your pre-enlistment paperwork,
you failed to disclose the fact that you had engaged in sexual
activity with a person who was of the same gender sex. On 16 May
1967, you confessed to having a sexual relationship with a male
prior to your enlistment. However, since you failed to disclose
this important information on your in-processing paperwork, this
is considered fraudulent enlistment. It was determined that your
lack of properly disclosing this information warranted assigning
a reenlistment code of RE-4 for fraudulent entry into the
Military. On 6 October 1967, you were discharged with a general
discharge due to fraudulent enlistment.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change in the characterization of
service or reenlistment code, which was based on your fraudulent
entry. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is
appropriately assigned when an individual is discharged for
fraudulent entry and is not recommended for retention.
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 mind that a

esumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

@onsequently, when*applying for a correction of an official naval
Hpcord, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

hes

Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05669-09

    Original file (05669-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    + : A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for fraudulent entry and is not recommended for retention. 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 | CY2011 | 05826-11

    Original file (05826-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2011. It wag determined that your lack of properly disclosing information warranted assigning of a reentry code of RE-4 for fraudulent entry into the military. 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 | CY2012 | 04045-12

    Original file (04045-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2013. It was determined that your lack of properly disclosing this information warranted administrative separation for fraudulent entry. 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 | CY2009 | 13351-09

    Original file (13351-09.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 September 2010. However, you failed to disclose this important information during your enlistment physical. 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 | CY2010 | 00510-10

    Original file (00510-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00459-10

    Original file (00459-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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 .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR459-13

    Original file (NR459-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ~ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . 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. On 14 August 2006 you were notified of administrative separation by reason of defective and fraudulent enlistment due to your failure to disclose pre-service history of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06477-07

    Original file (06477-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2008. 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. As a result of concealing your pre-service homosexual activities, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04896-09

    Original file (04896-09.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. As a result of your failure to disclose this information, your commanding officer (CO) initiated administrative discharge action by reason of misconduct due to fraudulent entry. On 25 June 1993, the discharge authority directed that you be discharged by reason of fraudulent enlistment with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05157-10

    Original file (05157-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2011. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...