Last saved by: terry.bynum

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

				TRG
	Docket No:5361-07 
	14 May 2008

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

Subj:	REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD - -

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 Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that his RE-4 reenlistment code be changed.

2 The Board consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations
of error and injustice On 22 April 2008 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 submitted in a timely manner.

c.	Petitioner hurt his ankle prior to reporting to active duty. He states that he did not tell anyone about the problem because he thought it would heal in a few days. On 1 February 2006 he reported to recruit training. However, the ankle continued to get worse and it was determined that he should be separated from the Navy. On 14 February 2006, he was notified of separation processing by reason of erroneous enlistment and fraudulent enlistment. At that time 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 22 February 2006. At that time, he was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

d.	Petitioner states in his application that his ankle has 
healed and he desires a change in his reenlistment code so that he can enlist in the Army. A doctor states that there is now no evidence of ankle pain or instability.

e.	The Board is aware that the only authorized reenlistment code when an individual is separated due to fraudulent enlistment is RE-4. However, regulations allow the assignment of an RE-3E reenlistment code when an individual is separated by reason of erroneous enlistment.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. The Board believes that Petitioner thought that the ankle problem would go away after a few days and only concealed his injury because he wanted to serve. Therefore, it now appears that it would be appropriate to change the reason for separation to erroneous enlistment which is one of the reasons for which he was processed for separation.

The record should then be corrected to show that on 22 February 2006 he was assigned an RE-3E reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.

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 reasons for the change in the Reason for separation and reenlistment code.

RECOMMENDATION:

a.	That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 22 February 2006 he was separated from the Navy by reason of erroneous enlistment.

b.	That Petitioner’s naval record then be further corrected to show that on 22 February 2006 he was assigned an RE-3E reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.

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	BRIAN J. GEORGE
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)) 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.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director