DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
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 20370-5100 TRG
Docket No: 1904-03
25 July 2003
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To :
Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF AVAL RECORD OF d
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 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.
2. 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 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 Naval Reserve on 28 May 1998
at age 26. Since he enlisted in the advanced pay grade program,
he was temporarily advanced to petty officer third class (SK3; E-
4). In the performance evaluation for the period 16 December
1998 to 15 June 1999, the individual trait average (ITA) was 3.9
and he was recommended for promotion and retention in the Naval
Reserve.
d. A service record entry, dated 15 ~pril 2000, prepared by
the Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center (M&MCRC), Miami FL,
states that Petitioner was being removed from a drill assignment
and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) because of
unsatisfactory drill attendance. He was not recommended for
reaffiliation with the drilling ready reserve without prior
approval of the Commander, Naval Reserve Force. However, in a
performance evaluation for the period 16 June 1999 to 15 June
2000, he received an ITA of 3.0 and was recommended for promotion
and retention in the Naval Reserve.
e. The next entry in Petitioner's record, dated 18 January
2001, which also was prepared by the N&MCRC, Miami, states that
he was being honorably discharged on that date due to
unsatisfactory drill attendance with an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The discharge processing documentation is not filed in the
record.
f. Petitioner states in his application that he missed two
drill weekends and, although he tried to reschedule the drills,
he was transferred to the IRR. He believes that his discharge
with an RE-4 reenlistment code on 18 January 2001 was excessive.
He desires to return to a drilling status.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. The Board notes the conflicting entries in the record
showing that he was transferred to the IRR on 16 April 2000 by
N&MCRC, Miami because of poor drill attendance, then was issued a
good performance evaluation for the period ending 15 June 2000,
and then was discharged by N&MCRC, Miami on 18 January 2001
because of unsatisfactory drill attendance with an RE-4
reenlistment code. Since there is no explanation in the record
for the confusing entries, and the only problem is poor drill
attendance, the Board concludes that cancellation of the
discharge is warranted. Therefore, the record should be
corrected to show that he was not discharged with an RE-4
reenlistment code on 18 January 2001. With this correction, the
record will show that he transferred to the IRR on 15 April 2000
and has remained in that status since then. The record will also
continue to show that he was not recommended for reaffiliation on
15 April 2000 due to unsatisfactory drill attendance.
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 reasons for the cancellation of the
discharge and that a waiver is still required before he can
return to a drilling status.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he
was not discharged on 18 January 2001 but remained a member of
the IRR.
b. That the record continue to show that he was not recommended
for reaffiliation on 15 April 2000 when he was transferred to the
IRR.
c. 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
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
authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
Executive
or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06596-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Naval Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that he be reinstated in the Naval Reserve. His overall record while he In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he was not discharged on 20 June 2001 but transferred to the IRR and recommended for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12209-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting his naval record be corrected by being reinstated in the Navy Reserve rather than discharged on 7 April 2005. ot 2. Normally, a reservist who has shown consistently good performance would be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and recommended for reaffiliation. It believes that the general discharge was too harsh and the more favorable action of transferring him to the IRR and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11329-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMS Docket No: 11329-08 16 January 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00418-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-510@RS Docket No: 418-07 28 March 2007 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09629-06
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that the record be corrected to show that she was advanced to petty officer second class (PN2; E-5), and by changing her reenlistment code.2. The Board believes that her six years of excellent service and the fact that she was unable to pass the PFA only because of her foot problem support her contention that a nonrecommendation for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08322-01
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 Bpard requesting that her record be corrected to show that she was not discharged on 1 October 2000 but continued to serve in the She is also requesting credit for paid-drills from February 2001. It CONCLUSION: The fact that the doctor found her physically The Board believes that...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130017317
Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 3 March 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Unsatisfactory Participation, AR 135-178, Chapter 13 e. Unit of assignment: 387 Medical Logistics Company, Miami, FL f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 24 January 2007/8 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 6 years, 1 month, 9 days h. Total Service: 6 years, 2 months, 11 days i. On 17 December 2012, the commander notified the applicant of the initiation of separation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06138-99
the Board believes that if Given the circumstances, had understood his situation he would have qualified Therefore, the Board concludes that the record It is clear that Petitioner The best way to accomplish this action is to correct the two year 3 enlistment in the Regular Navy of 23 December 1975 to show that The record should it was an enlistment in the Naval Reserve. With these corrections, years of qualifying service in the reserve component, will have 20 qualifying years for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08220-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 8220-07 5. May 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF ‘fil Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.c. 1552 Encl: (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record 1.
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00953
ND04-00953 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040525. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :890128: Enlistment contract into the USNR documents acknowledgement of the requirement to participate as prescribed by the regulations of the Naval Reserve the six year term in the Naval Reserve Selected...