DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
		2 NAVY ANNEX
						WASHINGTON DC 203705100

		TRG
										Docket No: 8195-05
2 March 2006

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

Subj REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF 
—

Ref:	(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) Case Summary
(2)	Subject’s naval record

1.	Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed an application with this Board requesting changes in the reason for his discharge and reenlistment code.

2.	The Board, consisting of Mr. and Ms. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error injustice on 14 February 2006 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.	Petitioner’s application was filed in a timely manner.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 20 September 2004 at age 18. On 17 November 2004 he was referred to the mental health unit (MHU) because of a possible suicide attempt. The entry documenting this referral states as follows:

(He) cut the top of his left forearm. He stated that he was practicing for the “real thing” to see how it was. This recruit is definitely in need of mental help. Definite suicide risk.

On 30 November 2004 Petitioner was transferred for separation processing. The ensuring service record entry stated, in part, as follows:
MHU diagnosed (him) with a depressive disorder not otherwise specified, which existed prior to enlistment. MHU stated that (he is) currently experiencing a major depressive episode. MHU recommended (entry level separation) as soon as (he) is cleared medically     MHU stated “if retained he is a risk for recurrent of depression and dangerous to self and others       (He) states he never received any type of counseling or medical for depression or any psychological issues prior to enlistment.

d.	On 1 December 2004 Petitioner was notified of separation processing by reason of fraudulent enlistment due to his failure upon enlistment to divulge a preservice medical condition, which would have effected his eligibility for enlistment. In Connection with this processing, he elected to waive his procedural rights. After review, the separation authority directed an entry level separation by reason of fraudulent enlistment and he was so separated on 6 December 2004. At that time he was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-3F reenlistment code.

e.	In his application, Petitioner states that when asked if he knew he suffered from depression prior to enlistment, he stated that his mother told him he was depressed during puberty. However, he also states that he was never seen by a mental health professional and was never prescribed any medication to control depression. Therefore, he believes that he answered all preenlistment questions truthfully and did not fraudulently enlist in the Marine Corps. He further states that his depression arose when he suffered fractures to both legs during bootcamp, and realized he was not going to fulfill his dream of being a Marine and having a career in law enforcement. He has submitted two character references attesting to the fact that he is an Eagle Scout and a solid citizen. He desires a change in his record so that he can pursue a career in law enforcement.

f.	Marine Corps regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3F reenlistment code when an individual is separated prior to the completion of recruit training, and such a code is routinely assigned in most cases.

g.	Regulations allow for an individual to be separated by reason of erroneous enlistment if there was a fact or condition which, had it been known, would have prevented enlistment. In this case, Petitioner is essentially contending that he was unaware that he suffered from a depressive disorder and would have been denied enlistment if he had known and informed his recruiter.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. Although there is no evidence to support Petitioner’s contention that he was unaware that he suffered from a depressive disorder, the Board believes his version of events is credible given the character references, which outline his achievements prior to entering the Marine Corps. Whichever version is correct, the Board believes that, in retrospect, a reason for separation of fraudulent enlistment is unnecessarily derogatory. Accordingly, the Board concludes that the reason for separation should now be changed to erroneous enlistment.

Concerning the request for a change in the reenlistment code, the Board concludes that he has been treated no differently than many others in his situation, and a change in the reenlistment code is not warranted.

The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand why the reason for separation was changed.

RECONIVIENDAT ION:

a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 6 December 2004 he was separated by reason of erroneous enlistment vice the reason for separation now of record.

b. That Petitioner’s request for a change in the reenlistment code be denied.

c. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in 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	ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Recorder	Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e))
3 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 Navy.

      W. DEAN PFEFIFFER
Executive Director

4