Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06232-01
Original file (06232-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF  THE  NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   OF  NAVAL  R E C O R D S  

2   N A V Y   ANNEX 

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

TRG 
Docket No: 6232-01 
24 January 2001 

From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To : 

Secretary of the Navy 

Ref: 

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

Encl:  (1) Case Summary 

(2) Subject's naval record 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Petitioner, a 
former enlisted member of the United States Navy filed an 
application with this Board requesting a change in her 
reenlistment code. 

2.  The Board, consisting of Mr. Milner, Ms. McCormick and Ms. 
Gilbert, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice 
on 8 January 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.  Petitioner's application was filed in a timely manner. 

c.  Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 11 December 1996 at 
age 20.  She successfully completed initial training and, on 12 
May 1997, reported aboard the USS JOHN F. KENNEDY  (CV 67).  She 
was married on 5 February 1998 and subsequently had a child.  On 
19 November 1998 she was notified of separation processing due to 
parenthood because she could not comply with family care 
requirements if she had duty or deployments.  On 17 December 
1998, the commanding officer directed an honorable discharge, but 
stated that " (Her) performance and conduct during her enlistment 
to date has been outstanding."  She was honorably discharged on 
18 December 1998 with an RE-4 reenlistment code.  At that time, 
she was serving in pay grade E-2. 

d.  Normally, an individual is not advanced from E-2 to E-3 

before serving 18 months on active duty. 

e.  Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3B or an 

RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to 
parenthood.  Regulations also require the assignment of an RE-4 
reenlistment code when an individual does not meet professional 
growth criteria by advancing to pay grade E-3 during an extended 
period of active duty. 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the 
majority, consisting of Mr. Milner and Ms. McCormick, concludes 
that Petitioner's request warrants favorable action.  The Board 
notes the commanding officer's comments concerning her excellent 
performance.  Further, the only reason she was discharged was 
because of parenthood.  The majority disregards the fact that she 
was only an E-2 when discharged because she was not eligible to 
be advanced to E-3 until 11 June 1998, and after that date she 
was pregnant and having child care problems.  Accordingly, the 
majority concludes that no useful purpose is now served by the 
RE-4 reenlistment code and it should now be changed to RE-3B as 
an exception to policy. 

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. 

MAJOR1 TY RECOMMENDATION : 

a.  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. 

b.  That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in 

Petitioner ' s naval record. 

MINORITY CONCLUSION: 

Ms. Gilbert disagrees with the majority and concludes that 
Petitioner's request does not warrant favorable action.  She 
notes that Petitioner had over six months to advance to E-3 and 
did not do so.  Since Petitioner has been treated no differently 
than others who failed to advance to E-3, the minority could not 
find an error or injustice in the assignment of the RE-4 
reenlistment code. 

MINORITY RECOMMENDATION: 
That Petitioner ' s request be denied. 

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 

Acting Recorder 

5.  The foregoing report of the Board is submitted for your 
review and action. 

MAJOR1 TY RE PORT : 

W. DEAN P 

Reviewe  and approved: 

A 

APR  2 4  n:, 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04620-01

    Original file (04620-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted membr of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 11 June 1997. The Board, consisting of Ms. LeBlanc, Ms. Gilbert, and Mr. Neuschafer, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 3 April 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07857-01

    Original file (07857-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 18 February 2000. 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-3B reenlistment code. That...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02056-02

    Original file (02056-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    2056-02 25 March 2002 From: To: Subj: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF a_, t* Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's Naval Record (4) DD Form 214 Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting, in effect, that her reenlistment code be changed. She had no disciplinary actions during...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06065-02

    Original file (06065-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a ber in the Navy, filed an application with ng that her reenlistment code be changed to . The Board excellent service, RE-4 reenlistment reenlistment due t Board believes tha reenlistment code less restrictive R recruiters that he reenlistment is au The Board further should be filed in undl reviewers will reenlistment code. Given the circumstances, the ncludes that this Report of Proceedings 'etitioner's naval record so that all future stand the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11838-10

    Original file (11838-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected by changing block 27 (Reentry Code) of her Certificate of Release or Discharge from Aetive Duty (DD Form 214) from “RE-4" (Not Recommended for Retention) to “RE-3B” (Parenthood). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Blanchard and J. Hicks: and Ms. McCormick, reviewed allegations of error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06318-01

    Original file (06318-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    6318-01 7 December 2001 From: To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's Naval Record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting, in effect, that her reenlistment code be changed. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Dunn, Milner and Pauling 2. reviewed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06341-01

    Original file (06341-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 ELP Docket No 6341-01 29 January 2002 From: To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 0 Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's Naval Record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting, in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06423-07

    Original file (06423-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00TRGDocket No:6423-0722 May 2008From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OFRef: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that her RE-4 reenlistment code be changed.2. Petitioner’s case was considered by the Naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08485-06

    Original file (08485-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that her reenlistment code be changed.2 Board, consisting of Ms. Ms. and Ms. previewed Petitioner’s allegations error andinjustice on 9 January 2007 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. The Board further concludes that this Report of proceedings...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07204-06

    Original file (07204-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 2O370-51OODocket No: 07204-06 23 January 2007From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OFRef: (a) 10 U.S.C. Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of parenthood. That Petitioners s naval record be corrected to show that on 9 July 2002 Petitioner was issued a RE-3B reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code actually...