DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 6817-00 4 May 2001
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) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(2) Subject’s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an
enlisted member of the United States Naval Reserve filed enclosure (1)
with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a
better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 8
January 1993.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Zsalman, Mr. Dunn and Ms. Hare,
reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 24 April
2001 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. Although it appears that Petitioner’s application was not
filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive
the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits.
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 12 January 1983 and
served on active duty until he was honorably discharged on 8 January
1993, a period of almost 11 years. During his service he was advanced
to BM3 (E-4) and was awarded two Good Conduct Medals. He was denied
reenlistment because he had reached high years tenure for an
individual serving in pay grade E-4. In accordance with regulations
then in effect he was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
d. Petitioner was granted a waiver and reenlisted in the Naval
Reserve on 6 October 1999. Since his enlistment he has been advanced to
BM2 (E-5) and has submitted documentation that he has qualified as an
Enlisted Surface Warfare Specialist and as an Enlisted Aviation Warfare
Specialist. He desires a change in the RE-4 reenlistment code so that he
can reenlist in the Regular Navy.
e. Petitioner has submitted evidence that he is currently serving
as a civilian able seaman aboard the USNS CONCORD (T-AFS 5) and his ship
is making regular deployments supporting the Navy.
f. The Board is aware that on 28 June 1993, about six months after
his discharge, the regulations changed to allow the assignment of an RE-6
reenlistment code to individuals denied reenlistment because of high
years tenure.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board
concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. The Board
notes Petitioner almost 11 years of good service and that the only reason
he was denied reenlistment in 1993 was his inability to be advanced to
BM2. Furthermore, he has been granted a waiver to reenlist in the Naval
Reserve, has been advanced to BM2, and is extremely well qualified for
further service. Since the regulations changed shortly after his
discharge, the Board concludes that no useful purpose is now served by
the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 8 January 1993 and it should now
be changed to RE-6 as an exception to the policy in effect when he was
discharged. This change may not allow enlistment in the Navy but it more
accurately reflects the reason for denial of reenlistment and this code
is considered less stigmatizing than a code of RE-4.
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 reenlistment code.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by issuing a DD Form 215
to show that he was assigned an RE-6 reenlistment code on 8 January 1993
vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
b. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
2
complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN ALAN E. GOLDSMI H
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.
~
~ W. DEAN
Executive Director
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 08198-04
The Board, consisting of Mr. Leeman, Mr. Pfeiffer and Ms. McCormick, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 16 August 2005 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Petitioner subsequently enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve, On 14 September 2001 he reported for active duty and served for one year. Therefore, Petitioner’s record should be corrected to show that on 11...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03409-02
f. An individual serving as a SGT is limited to 13 years of Recently assigned to 2311 "Unlimited potential in MOS." h. A letter to Petitioner of 22 January 2002 from a representative of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) states that the RE-4 reenlistment code was properly assigned. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board now finds the existence of an injustice warranting The Board noted that although he did receive corrective action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04732-01
b. Petitioner's application to the Board was filed in a timely manner. Petitioner's naval record. This code will allow reenlistment if he is otherwise and the support he has received He concludes that the best In this regard, he The minority also 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 and reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10718-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMW Docket No: 10718-07 31 July 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF eee Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. e. In his application, Petitioner states that he was discharged from the Navy because of high year tenure and believes that he should have received an RE-6 reenlistment code. Accordingly, the Board concludes that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10718-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting to change his RE-4 reenlistment code that was assigned on 30 December 1992, when he was honorably discharged.2. In his application, Petitioner states that he was discharged from the Navy because of high year tenure and believes that he should have received an RE—6 reenlistment code.f. The Board also finds that regulations authorize assignment of an RE-6...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05297-02
The GCMCA declined to act on Petitioner's specific complaint about the NJP since applicable directives state that such a disciplinary action is not a proper subject of an Article 138 complaint. OONOV02' to OlMAR15, as corrected by the (GCMCA), refers to the results of (NJP) where the charged deiekination that your Evaluation Report for the reporting period of;ense does not state an offense under the UCMJ. Paragraph 4 q. UCMJ Article 92(1)2 states that it is an offense to or beyond the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05358-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his reenlistment code be changed. Documentary material considered -by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 3 June 2005, to RE-6.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04516-04
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a commissioned officer in the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his reenlistment code be changed.2.The Board, consisting of Mr.and Ms. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error an injusticeon 27 July 2004 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Since he is now serving well in the National Guard and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03354-02
1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record The Board, consisting of Messrs. Zsalman, Pfeiffer, and Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting that his reenlistment code be changed. Punishment imposed was forfeitures paygrade E-2, and The restriction and extra f& two months, reduction to Petitioner served without .1990 for d. On 8 October 1994, Petitioner received NJP...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09474-05
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL OF RECORD Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting a change in his reenlistment code. He now requests a change in his reenlistment code so he can apply to the active guard and reserve.