D E P A R T M E N T OF T H E N A V Y
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TRG
Docket No: 4163-01
2 April 2002
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To :
Secretary of the Navy
RECORD OF
Ref:
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl :
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) Subject's naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an
enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed enclosure (1) with
this Board requesting that his record be corrected by changing
the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 24 July 2000.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Harrison, Mr. Pauling and Mr.
McPartlin, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 26 March 2002 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. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 25 July 1996 at age
20. On 5 February 1998 he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
for dereliction of duty and received a suspended reduction in
rate. An entry on his certificate of personnel security and
access form of 5 February 1998 states that he was debriefed
because he had a medical condition which would require permanent
removal from sea duty, and he had received NJP for classified
material insecurity. On 8 April 1998 he reported to the
Personnel Support Detachment, Mayport, Florida. In the
performance evaluation for the period ending 7 July 1999, his
individual trait average was 3.4 with a "must promote1'
recommendation. The evaluation comments state "although working
out of his rate, he completed all tasks assigned with quality
results . "
d. On 8 July 1998 Petitioner reported aboard the USS
NORMANDY (CG 60) for duty. In the performance evaluation for the
period ending 7 July 1999, his individual trait average was 3.2
and he was recommended for promotion and retention in the Navy.
The evaluation comments state as follows:
ENTHUSIASTIC AND RELIABLE TEAM PLAYER
- Exceptional laundryman. Independently manages and
maintains all aspects of laundry facility onboard USS
NORMANDY.
- Excellent work ethic. Provides the highest quality
service to NORMANDY crew and embarked detachment.
Displays genuine concern for positive results.
- Dedicated worker. Contributed several off-duty hours
getting the job done during stores onload, vending
operations, ship's tore breakouts, and intensive field
days while maintaining highest standards of customer
service.
SEAMAN-CONSISTENTLY
SERVICEMAN ARENA. DISPLAYS A POSITIVE ATTITUDE AND
CONTRIBUTES SIGNIFICANTLY TO (THE) DIVISION.
EXCELS IN THE SHIP ' s
Petitioner was released from active duty on 24 July 2000 with his
service characterized as honorable. At that time he was not
recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
e. At that time of Petitioner's release from active duty
his rating was CTOSN and he had apparently been serving out of
his rating since 1 April 1998. The Board is aware that
regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3R reenlistment
code for failure to meet professional growth criteria to
individual who have not passed an advancement examination for
petty officer third class. There is no documentation in the
record showing that he ever passed an advancement examination and
it is doubtful that he would be recommended for advancement to
CT03 since he may not have been qualified to serve in that
rating. An RE-3R reenlistment code means an individual is
recommended for a probationary reenlistment during which they
must advance to petty officer third class.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. The Board notes that Petitioner received NJP for a
security violation and had other problems which prevented him
from serving in his rating. However, the Board also notes that
he served in an excellent manner from 16 July 1998 until his
release from active duty on 24 July 2000. The Board concludes
that the quality of his service after the NJP was such that a
change in the RE-4 reenlistment code is warranted.
The Board notes that there is no evidence that Petitioner ever
passed an advancement examination which would normally make an
RE-3R reenlistment code appropriate. However, given the
circumstances, especially his fine performance of duty, the Board
concludes that an RE-1 reenlistment code should be assigned in
this case as an exception to policy.
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 assignment of the
RE-1 reenlistment code.
RECOMMENDAT I ON :
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
on 24 July 2000 he was assigned an RE-1 reenlistment code vice
the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
b. 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
Recorder
ALAN E . G O L D ~ T ~ T H -
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
a u t h o r i t y of r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , h a s been approved by t h e Board on
behalf of t h e S e c r e t a r y of t h e Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00085-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 7 December 1989. The page 9 shows that in the evaluation for the period ending 7 December 1989, he was assigned marginal marks of 3.0 in the categories of reliability and personal behavior. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01904-03
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member in the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 18 January 2001. The Board, consisting of Ms.-Ms.-dand Mr. -, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 15 July 2003 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07368-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show reinstatement on active duty or a change in the reenlistment code. However, after reviewing the Navy's evaluation, the Board concludes that even if Petitioner did not have a personality disorder, his problems were sufficiently severe to warrant discharge. The Board notes that portion of the DVA evaluation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07771-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he was reduced in grade from LCPL (E-3) to PFC (E-2), vice to W T (E-1) . Since Petitioner has been treated no differently than others discharged by reason of drug abuse, the Board concludes that there was no error or injustice in the assignment of the RE-4B reenlistment code. The Board further...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01172-99
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 reenlistment code be changed. 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 he was assigned an RE-1 reenlistment code, contrary to the recommendation in the last performance evaluation. That Petitioner's naval record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08179-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy 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 24 November 1998. At that time, he was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06232-01
The majority 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 assignment of the RE-3B reenlistment code. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 18 December 1998 she was assigned an RE-3B reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record. Since Petitioner has been treated no differently than others who failed to advance to E-3, the minority could...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02551-02
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL R E C O R D S 2 N A V Y A N N E X W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0 M E H : ~nli Docket No: 255 1-02 1 1 June 2002 From: To : ('hair~n;tn, Board tor ('orrecl~on of Naval Kccord\ Secreti~ry 01' the Na\fy REVIEW 01: NAVAI. 1'111-suant to the provisions of' referc~ic~ t'iletl enclosure ( I ) wit11 this rle action. Docket No: 255 1-02 RECOMMENDATION That Petitioner's naval record he corrected, where appropriate, to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07625-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record. At that time he was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all future reviewers will...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00451-05
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. In order to receive an RE-3R reenlistment code, a Sailor must be recommended for advancement or be promotable. Based on the foregoing, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s record does not warrant the worst reenlistment code of RE-4, and that code should be changed to RE-3R.