DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SRB
Docket No. 03838-03
28 October 2003
From:
To:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
Subj:
REVIEW OF
Ref:
(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl:
(1) Case Summary
(2) 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 his naval record be corrected to
show a more favorable reenlistment code.
rd, consisting of Mr.
, reviewed Petitioner's a
Mr.
error and
injustice on 28 October 2003, 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
3.
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.
Although it appears that Petitioner's application to the
Board was not filed in a timely manner,
justice to waive the statue of limitations and review the
application on its merits.
it is in the interest of
C .
Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 2 September 1981 for
four years at age 18.
served well, earning good evaluations and advancing in rate to
petty officer third class
During the next 29 months, Petitioner
(MS3; E-4).
d.
On 25 January 1984, in connection with his transfer to
(CV-59), Petitioner signed a service record entry
USS FORRESTAL
in.which he promised to reenlist or extend his enlistment for a
period of which would enable him to serve a 24 month tour of
duty aboard FORRESTAL.
failure to do so would result in the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code.
training detachment on 18 February 1984.
Petitioner then reported aboard FORRESTAL
At that time, Petitioned was told that
e.
Petitioner served well aboard FORRESTAL, earning
excellent evaluations and receiving a good conduct medal.
However, he did not reenlist or extend his enlistment.
Accordingly, when he was honorably released from active duty on
30 August 1985,
code due to his refusal to incur the required obligated service.
When Petitioner was honorably discharged at the end of his
military obligation in September 1987, he was not recommended
for reenlistment.
Petitioner was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
f.
In his application to the Board, Petitioner states that
he was told that he might have
According to him, he was informed of
when he transferred to FORRESTAL,
to extend his enlistment.
the extension requirement just two days prior to his release
from active duty.
RE-4 reenlistment was not explained to him.
He further states
that he has been a police officer for 11 years in Philadelphia,
PA.
Coast Guard Reserve.
He needs the reenlistment code changed in order to join the
Petitioner also states that the meaning of an
‘CL
The record contains a 1992 inquiry from the
Philadelphia Police Department, submitted in connection with
Petitioner's application for employment.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
Petitioner served without disciplinary problems and
action.
performed his duties in an excellent manner for four years,
attaining the rate of MS3 and earning a good conduct medal.
Board also notes his apparent good service as a law enforcement
officer and his desire to serve in the reserve component.
The
Therefore, the Board believes that in retrospect, although the
RE-4 reenlistment code was properly assigned, it is now unduly
restrictive and should be changed as a matter of clemency.
Additionally, an RE-1 reenlistment code more accurately reflects
his potential to perform further useful military service,
Accordingly, the Board concludes that Petitioner's reenlistment
code should be changed to RE-1 and he should be recommended for
reenlistment.
RECOMMENDATION:
.a.
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
he was issued an RE-1 reenlistment code on 30 August 1985, vice
the RE-4 reenlistment code actually issued on that date.
b.
That the record be further corrected to show that on
1 September 1987, Petitioner was recommended for reenlistment.
C .
That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
4.
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
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
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.
723.6(e))
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04516-04
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a commissioned officer in the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his reenlistment code be changed.2.The Board, consisting of Mr.and Ms. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error an injusticeon 27 July 2004 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Since he is now serving well in the National Guard and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02109-01
former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected by changing the 4 reenlistment code issued on 19 April 1985. f. Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3B or an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged because of parenthood. adverse performance the Board concludes that no it is clear that the parenthood Given the circumstances, Although his command This code will The Board further concludes that this...
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 | CY2002 | 08013-02
Guard, his current service in the Naval Reserve and the other evidence showing he has been a good citizen, the Board concludes that no useful purpose is now served by the general discharge and it recharacterized to honorable However, Petitioner's request for reenlistment code was denied. Petitioner's record should be corrected to show that on 12 January 1982 he was discharged by reason of Secretarial Authority with an RE-1 reenlistment code. The Board further concludes that this Report of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 11137 12
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 BUG Docket No: 11137-12 4 December 2012 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Sub}: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ow ears acm. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his general...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01136-06
He then served in the Navy Reserve, earning six qualifying years for reserve retirement between 1994 and 2000. On 14 December 2003, he reenlisted in the Navy Reserve for six years. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record to document the Board's action and so all future reviewers will understand the reasons for the change in the retirement grade.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 06102-98
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To : Secretary of the Navy TRG Docket No: 6102-98 24 August 1999 D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E N A V Y BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 2 NAVY ANNEX Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF - Ref: (a) Title 1 0 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the United States Naval Reserve filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his previous general discharge and RE-4...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02929-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Navy filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected by removing the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 23 April 1997 from his record, and/or reinstatement to DKl (E-6) with his original time in rate (TIR), He also requests a special selection board for chief petty officer. Since the NJP, Petitioner has reenlisted and has served On 25 July 2000 he reported aboard the The performance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01902-08
Since his release from active duty Petitioner has been an active driller in the Marine Corps Reserve and earned a promotion to Corporal [E-4]. Unfortunately for Petitioner at the time he was released from active duty he was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code based on the disciplinary action which occurred one month earlier. And finally there is his performance of duty as a Marine Corps reservist and desire to serve on extended active duty and thereby offer his support to the Marine Corps...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03609-06
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member in the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting, in effect, that his record be corrected in some manner to allow him to qualify for retirement.2 The Board, consisting of MrMr - and Mr reviewed Petitioner’s a1legation of error and injustice on 26 June 2007 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. ...