Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02760-04
Original file (02760-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


TRG
         Docket No: 2760-04
        13 May 2004

From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
         
         Subj : REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF


Ref:     (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
End:     (1) Case Summary
 (2)      Subject’s naval record
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member in the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show that
 a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 27 December 1999.
2.       The Board, consisting of Mr. , Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 11 May 2004 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.       Although it appears that Petitioner’s application 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 initially in enlisted in the Navy on 27 May 1986 and served continuously on active duty for over 13 years. In the performance evaluation for the period ending 15 March 1999, the individual trait average (ITA) was 3.58 and she was recommended for promotion and retention in the Navy.
d.       On 22 September 1999 Petitioner requested discharge due to her family situation. Seven day later, she indicated that she could not comply with the terms of the Family Care Plan Certificate. Since she was not available for watches, deployment or other military duties outside of normal working hours, she was processed for an administrative discharge by reason of parenthood. In connection with this processing, she elected to waive the right to have her case heard by an administrative discharge board. After review, the discharge authority directed discharge no later than 30 December 1999. In the performance evaluation for the period ending 18 December 1999 the ITA was 3.71 and she was recommended for promotion and retention in the Navy. She was honorably discharged on 27 December 1999, having completed 13 years, 7 months and 1 day of active duty. At that time, she was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
e.       In her application, Petitioner states that she had three children under 10, one of which had behavior problems; her active duty husband had received orders; and she was required to stand a rotating watch. She desires a change in the reenlistment code so that she can reenlist in the Naval Reserve to finish her career.
e.       Regulations require the assignment of an RE-3B or an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of parenthood. The RE-3B code means that the individual is recommended for reenlistment except for the disqualifying problem of parenthood. Such a code may be waived if the condition no longer exists. An RE-4 reenlistment code is assigned when an individual is not eligible for reenlistment.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. The Board is aware that Petitioner had over 13 years of excellent service at the time of her discharge. Since she was recommended for retention, except for the personal problems that led to the discharge, the Board concludes that the assignment of an RE-3B reenlistment code is more appropriate than the RE-4 code actually assigned. The RE-3B code will alert recruiters of the problems that led to discharge, but will not preclude consideration for reenlistment.
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 change in the reenlistment code.
RECONMENDAT ION:
a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 27 December 1999 she was assigned an RE-3B reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.














2





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 review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.


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.



                                                                                 W. DEAN PFEIFFER
                                                                                 Executive Director






























3

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05172-08

    Original file (05172-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR Docket No: 5172-08 5 February 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. e. On 6 February 2008 the discharge authority directed separation with a characterization of service warranted her service record and an RE-3B reenlistment code. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of...

  • 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 | CY2008 | 06682-08

    Original file (06682-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No: 06682-08 19 May 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF 3m Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. In Petitioner’s case, her RE-4 reenlistment code was not warranted based on her overall evaluations and her separation code should have been JDG for parenthood. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 10755-09

    Original file (10755-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her reenlistment code be changed. Nevertheless, she was administratively processed for separation by reason of parenthood due to her inability to comply with the NFC program. On 23 February 2004 the discharge authority, Navy Personnel Command (NPC), directed a reenlistment code of RE-3B, or a RE-4, if warranted by the service record.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00327-09

    Original file (00327-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference {a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her RE-4 reenlistment code be changed. Since an RE-3B reenlistment code is authorized by regulatory _ guidance for a Sailor who is separated by reason of .parenthood, the Board concludes that the interest of justice would better be better served by changing Petitioner’s RE-4 reenlistment code to Re-3B rather than the RE-4 now of record. That...

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 08376-00

    Original file (08376-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) 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 United (1) with this Board requesting that show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 code assigned on 13 July 2000 States Navy filed enclosure his record be corrected to . recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. ardhis desire to The Board believes that the...