DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TJR
Docket No: 3953-04
17 August 2004

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 Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2004. 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 ca eful and conscientious ~x~nside ation of th~ entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material erro- or iniust Ice

On 9 January 2001, prio to enlis ing in the Navy, you completed a security application in which you indicated that you did not have any unpaid judgments, financial delinquencies, or pending criminal charges. However, on 7 February 2001, a credit report stated that you had several pending financial delinquencies, bad debts, and unpaid judgments. Further, a background investigation report stated that you had pre-service civil involvement.

You enlisted in the Navy on 19 March 2001 at age 28 and served without disciplinary incident. On 5 November 2001, as a result of a security clearance investigation, you were notified of pending action to deny you a security clearance because of disqualifying information, specifically, unpaid judgments, financial delinquencies, and pre-service criminal charges.

On 26 March 2003 you submitted a written statement in which you explained in detail your attempts to rectify the discrepancies of the disqualifying information. You also stated that you were unaware of some of the discrepancies and disputed several of the entries.

Subsequently, on 16 May 2003, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of fraudulent enlistment due to your failure to disclose adverse financial information and pre-service civil involvement. On 2 June 2003, after consulting with legal counsel, you submitted a written statement explaining how you had attempted to rectify the adverse financial discrepancies and requested a waiver of the fraudulent enlistment so that you could remain in the Navy. However, on 10 June 2003, your commanding officer recommended an honorable discharge by reason of defective entry/induction due to fraudulent enlistment. This recommendation also stated in part, as follows:

Strongly recommend administrative separation.... (Member) has encountered personal issues requiring extensive leave, thus being absent from work..., waiver of fraudulent enlistment not in the best interest of the Navy..., based on service record review, recommend honorable discharge.

On 25 June 2003 the discharge authority then directed an honorable discharge by reason of fraudulent entry, and on 1 August 2003 you were so discharged and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your assertion that the assigned RE-4 reenlistment code is not representative of your honorable characterization of service and therefore should be changed. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code. Such a code is required when an individual is separated by reason of fraudulent entry. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

The Board did not consider whether the reason for your separation should be changed because you did not request such action and have no exhausted your administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). You may apply to NDRB by submitting the attached DD Form 293.

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 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.

3