DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 263-01
19 February 2002
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:
Secretary of the Navy
Subj:
OF
Ref:
(a)
10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments
(2) Case summary
(3) Subject's naval record
1.
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner,
a
former enlisted member of the Naval Reserve, filed enclosure
(1)
with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by
changing the reenlistment code.
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Beckett,
2.
Taylor, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 12 February 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.
McCulloch, and
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.
Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
C .
Petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 25 January
1994 and began a three year period of active duty on 8 September
1994.
incident.
He served during this period without disciplinary
d.
An entry on the enlisted performance record (page 9) notes
that Petitioner was advanced in rate to FN(E-3) on 16 March 1996.
Another page 9 entry dated 15 July 1996 notes that Petitioner
was recommended for advancement to
paygrade E-4.
e.
On 6 September 1997, while serving in
paygrade E-3,
Petitioner was honorably released from active duty upon
completion of his required active service, and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
f.
The applicable regulation in effect at the time of
1160.5C, notes that an
Petitioner's separation,
individual separated at the expiration of their obligated service
must meet the professional growth criteria before he/she may
reenlist.
The instruction states, in part, as follows:
OPNAVINST
the member must be: (1) serving as a petty
To satisfy professional growth criteria for the first
reenlistment....
officer or, (2) serving in
examination for advancement to
recommended for advancement,
petty officer in current enlistment and be currently
Failure to
recommended for advancement to
meet the professional growth criteria may result in denial
of further extensions or reenlistment.
paygrade E-3 having passed an
or (3) have formerly been a
paygrade E-4 and be currently
paygrade E-4.
An individual separated in
above criteria may receive an RE-3R reenlistment code if
recommended
separation.
for advancement to
paygrade E-4 at the time of
paygrade E-3 who fails to meet the
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 was separated at the completion
of his required active duty,
reflects honorable service without any disciplinary incidents.
and that his entire service record
‘An RE-3R reenlistment code is authorized by
The Board believes that the assigned RE-4 reenlistment code is
inappropriate.
regulatory guidance and may be assigned to individuals serving in
paygrade E-3 who are honorably released from active duty and who
are recommended for advancement, but have not been advanced to
paygrade E-4 or passed an advancement examination.
notes that Petitioner was recommended for advancement.
because he had completed his three years of active duty, there
was no time to take an advancement examination for
The Board
paygrade E-4.
Further,
In view of the foregoing,
injustice warranting the following corrective action.
the Board finds the existence of an
2
a.
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by showing
that he was
1997 and assigned an RE-3R reenlistment code.
honorably released from active duty on 6 September
b.
That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating
to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed, or
completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such
entries or material be added to the record in the future.
C .
That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's
naval record be returned to the Board,
this Report of Proceedings,
maintained for such purpose,
part of Petitioner's naval record.
together with a copy of
for retention in a confidential file
with no cross reference being made a
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
Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6
5.
(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (2 Code of Federal Regulation, 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.
Executive
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03581-02
growth criteria, officer third class, be serving in examination for advancement to recommended for advancement, officer in the current enlistment and be currently recommended for advancement to CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable It appears to the Board that Petitioner was issued an action. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4679 13
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 RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) reentry code, which was issued on 13 April 2013. At that time he was recommended for promotion and continued service in the Navy Reserve, and assigned an RE-4 reentry code. Such a code may also be assigned if the commanding officer does not recommend the individual for reenlistment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09446-06
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.2. The Board, consisting of Mr.reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of errbr and injustice on 2 May 2007 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. At that time he was assigned and RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11022-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN Docket No: 11022-10 28 October 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Tor Secretary of the Navy subs REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 1¢0 (9 Ref: (a) 10 U.8.€. 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 RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. ae......
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08516-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN Docket No: 08516-07 17 September 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF él Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record -1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04232-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 4 September 2001 and served for more than three years without disciplinary...
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01181-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 2010. 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. On 18 June 1993, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06569-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2011. 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. On 18 April 2004, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3, and assigned a reentry code of RE-3R.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02256-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100 TUR Docket No: 2256-09 25 January 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD 02y@———_RAadiazil Ret: (a) dQ U.S.C. The Board also takes into account Petitioner's record, which reflects honorable service and the lack of documentation specifying why he was not recommended for retention, advancement, or reenlistment. That...