DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No; 2162-08
6 November 2008
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records |
To: Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF iil
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 31 October 1997, when he was honorably released
from active duty.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. iy sega
Ms. WMS reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 5 November 2008, 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 ali 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. On 1 December 1992, Petitioner enlisted in the Navy at
age 19. He was subsequently awarded the Navy and Marine Corps
Medal, Navy Achievement Medal, Good Conduct Medal, attained pay
grade H-4, and consistently received favorable performance
evaluations that recommended promotion and retention. On
15 dune 1997, he received his last performance evaluation in
which he received an individual trait average of 4.0 and was
recommended for promotion and retention. On 20 August 1997,
he reported to a temporary command for duty under instruction. .
On 31 October 1997, he was honorably released from active duty
due to completion of required active service and assigned an
RE-4 reenlistment code. On 15 September 2000, he was honorably
discharged from the Navy Reserve due to the expiration of his
obligated service and was not recommended for retention.
e. In his application, Petitioner states that he was not
asked to extend his enlistment until after he completed an "A"
school, but made a decision at that time not to extend because
of family problems. He further states that he believes that he
has a lot to offer the Navy Reserve and would like to reenlist.
d. Regulations authorize assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment
code to service members who are honorably released from active
duty due to completion of required active service and are not
recommended for retention. Regulations also authorize
assignment of an RE-1 reenlistment code to service members who
meet professional growth criteria and are honorably released
from active duty due to completion of required active service.
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 Petitioner served without ©
incident, completed his required active service, attained pay
grade E-4, and was consistently recommended for retention and
promotion. The Board believes that the assignment of the RE-4
reenlistment code likely resulted from his refusal to extend
his enlistment after completing an "A" school, but finds that
other than the RE-4 reenlistment code on the DD Form 214, there
ig no evidence in the record to justify assignment of such a
code. Given his overall service record that included almost
five years of active service with no disciplinary action, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's record should be corrected to
show that he was assigned an RE-1 reenlistment code on
31 October 1997, and was recommended for retention on
15 September 2000.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
he was assigned an RE-1 reenlistment code on 31 October 1997,
vice the RE-4 actually assigned on that date.
b. That Petitioner's naval record be further corrected to
show that he was recommended for retention on 15 September
2000, when he was honorably discharged from the Navy Reserve.
2
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 ahove
entitled matter.
ROBERT D. 4ZSALMAN BRIAN J. GEORGE
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.
Were
W. DEAN PFEYRE
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05382-01
5382-01 14 December 2001 From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) 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 her reenlistment code be changed.. "must promote" and She was advanced to YN2 on Her next evaluation report...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06751-00
C. Petitioner reenlisted in the Navy on 31 August 1991 for six years as an EN3 (E-4). MAJORITY CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the majority, consisting of Messrs. Lightle and Geisler, concludes In this that Petitioner's request warrants favorable action. MINORITY CONCLUSION: The minority member, Mr. Taylor, agrees with Petitioner's request should be granted by changing his reenlistment code from RE-4 to RE-6.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07518-01
At the time of his reenlistment, However, available records During his he had completed nearly six years of active service. The record why Petitioner was assigned an not recommended for retention approval from Commander, Navy contains no explanation as to RE-4 reenlistment code. In June 2000, the HYT limit was changed to 12 At the time of Petitioner's discharge, This means that CONCLUSION: It appears to the Board that Petitioner may have been Upon review and consideration of all the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08640-00
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. l:he evidence of record the ':he RE-4 reenlistment code However, since there is RECOMMENDATION: a. 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.
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08376-00
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01861-02
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 Navy 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 November 2000. performance evaluation solely for the purpose of allowing the assignment of a better reenlistment code is unnecessary because the Board has the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02064-00
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 United States Marine Corps submitted an application to this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he was not discharged on 15 April 1998 but was retained in the Marine Corps until he qualified to retire. "has an alternate weight standard The fitness report 68" At that time, he...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04361-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting, in effect, that his reenlistment code be changed. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Ensley, Lippolis, and Shy 2. reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 11 October 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Accordingly, the Board concludes...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10710-07
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 29 September 2003, when he was honorably released from active duty. Regulations also authorize assignment of an RE-1 reenlistment code when a service member is eligible and recommended for retention. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned an RE-1 reenlistment code on 29...