DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMW
Docket No: 10718-07
31 July 2008
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF
eee
Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) Case Summary
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board
requesting to change his RE-4 reenlistment code that was
assigned on 30 December 1992, when he was honorably discharged.
2. The Board, consisting of Ms. Sagimes. Mr. gg and
Mr. (QM reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 30 July 2008, and pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the limited 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 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. On 31 October 1986, Petitioner reenlisted in the Navy at
age 25. On 30 June 1987, a recommendation for advancement was
withdrawn due to a weight problem. On 5 August 1987, he
acknowledged receiving a derogatory performance evaluation.
On 10 September 1987 and 28 February 1991, he was recommended
for advancement.
d. On 30 December 1992, a service record entry was made
which stated that Petitioner was being discharged due to
high year tenure and was not eligible to reenlist. On
30 December 1992, he was honorably discharged by reason of
completion of required active service due to high year tenure
and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
e. In his application, Petitioner states that he was
discharged from the Navy because of high year tenure and
believes that he should have received an RE-6 reenlistment
code.
£. Regulations authorize assignment of an RE-6 reenlistment
code to service members who are not eligible for reenlistment
due to high year tenure.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
the Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants relief.
Specifically, the Board finds that with the exception of being
assigned to a remedial physical fitness program, he was
subsequently recommended for advancement on two occasions and
had no disciplinary infractions. The Board also finds that
regulations authorize assignment of an RE-6 reenlistment code
to service members who are ineligible to reenlist due to high
year tenure. Accordingly, the Board concludes that ’
Petitioner's record should be corrected to show that he was
assigned an RE-6 reenlistment code.
RECOMMENDATION :
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
he was assigned an RE-6 reenlistment code on 30 December 1992,
vice the RE-4 actually assigned on that date.
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.
\ te
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN J.
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.
RA, Fen
Fexn_W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10718-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting to change his RE-4 reenlistment code that was assigned on 30 December 1992, when he was honorably discharged.2. In his application, Petitioner states that he was discharged from the Navy because of high year tenure and believes that he should have received an RE—6 reenlistment code.f. The Board also finds that regulations authorize assignment of an RE-6...
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 | CY2002 | 03409-02
f. An individual serving as a SGT is limited to 13 years of Recently assigned to 2311 "Unlimited potential in MOS." h. A letter to Petitioner of 22 January 2002 from a representative of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) states that the RE-4 reenlistment code was properly assigned. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board now finds the existence of an injustice warranting The Board noted that although he did receive corrective action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06817-00
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 record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 8 January 1993. The Board, consisting of Mr. Zsalman, Mr. Dunn and Ms. Hare, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 24 April 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03034-06
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,Mr and Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 7 September 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. On 8 August 2004, Petitioner was honorably discharged from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05358-08
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. Documentary material considered -by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 3 June 2005, to RE-6.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03838-03
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...
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 | 05911-02
At that time he was recommended for The reporting senior stated that . He also notes that his last enlisted performance evaluation recommended him for advancement and retention. The Board reaches this conclusion even Petitioner was recommended for advancement Furthermore, in both of 3 The Board further notes the letter of substandard service and its requirements for avoiding the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code upon separation, specifically, that the individual request an extension...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00813-07
He was assigned a reentry code of RE-4 because his commanding officer had withdrawn the recommendation for his advancement and retention on 20 July 2006. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show, as an exception to policy, that he was assigned a reentry code of RE-6 on 20 July 2006, vice the code of RE-~4 he actually received on that date. 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...