DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 451-05
6 October 2005
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF ~~IUhhUWi~~.
~UmmmmmuuI.m.
-
Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
End: (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 this
Board requesting that his reenlistment code be changed.
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs.iUU~ and~U~ reviewed
Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 4 October 2005
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. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 16 June 2000 after a
brief period in the Delayed Entry Program of the Naval Reserve.
d. Petitioner served without disciplinary incident until 6
September 2001, when he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
failure to obey a lawful order and was awarded restriction and extra
duty for 30 days, a $522 forfeiture of pay, and a suspended reduction
to paygrade E-1.
e. There is no indication in the record that Petitioner had any
other problems after the NJP. Although his earlier evaluations referred to
him as an average worker, he was eventually advanced to paygrade E-3. A
subsequent evaluation was more favorable and recommended him for early
promotion to third class petty officer (E-4).
e. Petitioner received a performance evaluation for the period 16
July 2003 to 26 May 2004, on the occasion of his separation, which
reflected an individual trait average of 3.00. This evaluation also
reflected that although Petitioner was promotable, he was not recommended
for retention.
f. On 25 June 2004 Petitioner, while serving in paygrade E-3, was
honorably released from active duty at the expiration of his enlistment,
and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
g. The applicable regulation in effect at the time of Petitioner’s
separation authorized the issuance of an RE-3R reenlistment code to a
Sailor who failed to meet the professional growth criteria during his first
enlistment. Such criteria included advancement to paygrade E-4, or passing
an examination for such advancement. In order to receive an RE-3R
reenlistment code, a Sailor must be recommended for advancement or be
promotable. A Sailor separated upon the expiration of enlistment may also
receive an RE-4 reenlistment code, which means that he or she is not
recommended for reenlistment.
CNCLUS ION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board
concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action.
The Board initially notes the relatively minor nature of Petitioner’s
disciplinary infraction that resulted in his one NJP, and that this
misconduct occurred two years and nine months prior to his honorable
release from active duty. The Board’s decision is also based on
Petitioner’s service record, which reflects honorable service, and the fact
that upon his release from active duty he was promotable, although for some
reason he was not recommended for retention. The Board therefore concludes
that the assigned RE-4 reenlistment code is unjust because an RE-3R
reenlistment code is authorized by regulatory guidance and may be assigned
to Sailors who are honorably released from active duty, while serving in
paygrade E-3, and who are promotable but have not been advanced to paygrade
E-4 or passed an advancement
2
examination. Concerning the nonrecommendation for retention in the last
performance evaluation, there does not appear to be any documentation in
the record to support such a nonrecommendation. 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.
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice
warranting the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4
reenlistment code, assigned on 25 June 2004, to RE-3R.
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, together with a copy of this Report of
Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file maintained for such
purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of 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 LAN E. GOLDSMITH
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 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. -~
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
3
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...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2006 | 10267-06
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, applied to this Board requesting a change in his reenlistment code.2. Petitioner then served without incident and was promoted to pay grade E-3 on 16 October 1992 e. On 31 March 1993 Petitioner was honorably released from active duty due to completion of active obligated service and assigned an RE-3R reenlistment code.f. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he was...
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 | CY2008 | 05129-08
The Board also finds that the service record entry dated 3 September 2003, does not justify assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code since the record shows that the last administrative action regarding his rank was a promotion to pay grade E-3 and not a reduction. Therefore, the Board concludes that the record should be corrected to show that he was assigned an RE-3R reenlistment code on 3 October 2003, and that he was recommended for retention on 22 October 2007. That Petitioner's naval...