DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
S
TRG
Docket No:
9 January 2002
5328-01
From:
To:
Subj:
Ref:
Encl:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 0
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
(1) Case Summary
(2) Subject's naval record
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
1.
former enlisted member of the Navy filed an application with this
Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he was
issued an honorable discharge and a better reenlistment code than
the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
The Board, consisting of Mr. Rothlein, Mr. Kastner and Mr.
2.
Pfeiffer, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 3 January 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record.
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
Documentary material
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
3.
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 reenlisted in the Navy for two years on 8 May
(ITA) of 4.29 in each evaluation.
1998, and subsequently, extended that enlistment for another
year. The next two evaluations in the record, covering the period
16 March 1998 to 15 March 2000,
are excellent with an individual
trait average
further evaluations in the record.
nonjudicial punishment for larceny and wrongful appropriation.
The punishment imposed included restriction, extra duty,
forfeitures of pay, and a reduction in rate from EN2 (E-5) to EN3
(E-4).
canceled.
reason of "completion of required active
he was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4
Subsequently, a recommendation for his advancement was
On 7 May 2001 he was issued a general discharge by
There are no
On 1 May 2001, he received
service!'
At that time,
reenlistment code.
completed 12 years, 8 months and 13 days of active service.
the time of his discharge, he had
At
d.
Regulations require the type of discharge warranted by
the service record when an individual is discharged due to
completion of required active service,
of all the evaluations in the enlistment.
Petitioner's discharge an
for the issuance of a general discharge.
of the two available evaluations is 4.29.
there was an
period ending 7 May 2001,
the minimum for an honorable characterization of service.
ITA of 1.0 in the unavailable evaluation for the
As indicated, the
Therefore, even if
his
ITA average would still be above
ITA average of below 2.0 was required
based on the
ITA average
At the time of
ITA
e.
An individual serving in pay grade E-4 with over 12
years of active service exceeds the length of service
limitations, and he must be denied further service.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
Petitioner's characterization of service must be as
warranted by his service record.
ITA average is
sufficient to require the issuance of an honorable discharge,
the Board concludes that the record should be corrected to show
that on 7 May 2001 he was issued an honorable discharge, vice the
general discharge now of record.
Since his
Concerning the reenlistment code, the Board notes that the last
unavailable evaluation would have been adverse since he was not
recommended for promotion and this means he probably was not
recommended for retention.
limitations imposed on individuals serving in pay grade E-4.
Board thus concludes that the nonjudicial punishment and the last
adverse performance evaluation,were sufficient to support the
assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code, and a change in that
code is not warranted.
Further, he had exceeded the service
The
RECOMMENDATION:
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 7
a.
May 2001 he was issued an honorable discharge by reason of
completion of required active service,
now of record.
vice the general discharge
b.
That
be denied.
Petitionerkrequest for a change in the reenlistment code
C .
That this Report of Proceedings
be filed in Petitioner's
2
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
naval record.
4.
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
u
/
'Acting Recorder
Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
5.
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05172-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR Docket No: 5172-08 5 February 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. e. On 6 February 2008 the discharge authority directed separation with a characterization of service warranted her service record and an RE-3B reenlistment code. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08376-00
1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the United (1) with this Board requesting that show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 code assigned on 13 July 2000 States Navy filed enclosure his record be corrected to . recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. ardhis desire to The Board believes that the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03253-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member in the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better characterization of service, separation code and reenlistment code. At the time of Petitioner's separation an average of 2.0 in all the ITA marks assigned during an enlistment was required for an honorable characterization of service. The Board notes his period of good service from 14 April 1998 to 17...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02338-03
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To : Secretary of the Navy Docket No: 2338-03 12 September 2003 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 T ~ G Subj : REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF - Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member in the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10137-05
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100TRG Docket No: 10137-05 28 March 2007 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF ggasi Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.c. 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 | CY2004 | 04079-04
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 careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 13 June 2001 as a petty officer second class (DK2; E-5). However,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00640-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMW Docket No: 640-07 19 July 2007 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting an upgrade of his discharge and a change in his reenlistment code. This evaluation recommended him...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01290-01
1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an 1. enlisted member of the Naval Reserve, this Board requesting that his record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code issued on 11 December 2001. filed an application with The Board, consisting of Mr. Adams, Mr. Pfeiffer and Mr. 2. The Board The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10710-07
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 29 September 2003, when he was honorably released from active duty. Regulations also authorize assignment of an RE-1 reenlistment code when a service member is eligible and recommended for retention. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned an RE-1 reenlistment code on 29...
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...