DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
WMP
Docket No. 3354-02
6 September 2002
From:
To:
Subj:
Ref:
Encl:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF
(a) 10 U.S.C. 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.
2.
Pauling, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 28 August 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.
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as
follows:
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
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 to the
Board 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 22 October
four years at age 18 in pay grade E-l.
incident until 10 October 1993, when he received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for disrespect towards an officer and
disobedience of an officer.
of $100 per month
30 days of restriction and extra duty.
duty were suspended for a period of six months.
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 for disrespect
towards a superior petty officer and false official statement.
paygrade E-3 and a forfeiture of
Punishment was reduction to
$531.
e.
Upon completion of his active obligated service on 21
December 1994, Petitioner was honorably released from active
duty, transferred to the Naval Reserve, and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
f.
Petitioner reenlisted in the Naval Reserve and is
His latest performance
presently attached to Mobile Inshore Underwater Warfare Unit 206
as a petty officer third class.
evaluation for the period of 13 April 2001 to 22 February 2002
His individual trait
contains an overall trait average of 3.29.
marks in the categories of personal job accomplishment/initiative
and teamwork were 4.0, and all other marks were 3.0.
recommended for advancement in the
recommended for retention,
on active duty in the TAR program.
officer stated that
member of CTG 53.8, (Petitioner) stood twelve hour watches as
part of force protection watch
volunteered for a variety of tasks and work details with an
extremely positive attitude.
*I The commanding officer also noted
The commanding
that he served as a trainer for watchstanders.
officer recommended Petitioner for sea duty and the TAR program.
"must
and was recommended for reenlistment
Furthermore, his commanding
He was
promotet' category,
"While deployed to South West Asia (SWA) as a
team," and "(Petitioner)
cl*
Petitioner has submitted documentation to show that
after his release from active duty, he earned a bachelor of
science degree in communications management.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants more favorable
action upon reconsideration.
original assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code was warranted
based on the evidence of record, the Board believes that it is
now appropriate to assign an RE-1 reenlistment code vice the more
restrictive code.
Petitioner is presently a member of the Naval Reserve as a petty
officer third class and would have required a waiver of the more
restrictive reenlistment code in order to reenlist.
Further, he
has received above average performance evaluations from his Naval
reserve unit, and has earned a college degree.
foregoing, the Board finds that the RE-4 reenlistment code no
longer is an accurate indication of Petitioner's ability to
perform further military service,
RE-1 reenlistment
This conclusion is based on the fact that
and it should be changed to an
Although it appears that the
In view of the
co$e.
2
RECOMMENDATION:
a.
the RE-4 reenlistment code,
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing
assigned on 21 October 1994, to RE-1.
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
and that the foregoing is a true and
review and deliberations,
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
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
has been approved by the Board on
authority of reference (a),
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Acting Recorder
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 08708-03
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a retired enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected to show a more favorable reenlistment code.2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on4 Augustl 2004, and, pursuant to its regulations determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Reference (b) authorizes the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08262-01
1552 (1) 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 Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show an honorable discharge and an RE-1 reenlistment code. He refused Captain's Mast The Board met on 17 The performance evaluation Petitioner received from the TEMDU command, for the period 24 April to 24 November 2000, is also...
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 | CY2002 | 00263-01
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. 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. (e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (2 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having...
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 | 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 | CY2002 | 02698-02
2698-02 28 August 2002 From: To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: Encl: (a) 10 U.S.C. In this regard, the Board notes the average marks In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of RECOMMENDATION: a. the RE-4 reenlistment code, That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing assigned on 16 June 2001, to RE-1. 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of...
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04163-01
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. 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. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner's naval record.
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...