DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 11631-08
6 March 2009

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy

 

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF igi

Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

Encl: (1) Case Summary
(2) Subject's naval record

1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former
enlisted member of the Marine Corps applied to this Board requesting
to change the RE-4 reenlistment code that was issued on 2 July 2007,
when he was released from active duty under honorable conditions. He
is currently serving in the Marine Corps Reserve.

 

2. The Board, consisting of Mr. CR, 1% z
Mr . ag. reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice

on 4 March 2009, 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, and a memorandum furnished by
Headquarters Marine Corps.

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. Petitioner’s application was filed in a timely manner.

c. On 3 July 2003, Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps at age
18 and subsequently served as a rifleman. On 6 February 2004, he had
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for drunk and disorderly conduct and
underage drinking. On 13 February 2004, he deployed to Iraq with his
infantry unit. On 13 March and 5 June 2004, he had NUP for breaking
restriction by going to the recreation center, assault, and use of
provoking words. On 2 July 2004, it appears that suspended
punishment from an NUP was vacated and he was reduced in rank and as
such he was assigned reduction (RD) proficiency and conduct marks of
4.2 and 1.9, respectively. On 28 July 2004, he was counseled
regarding his disciplinary actions and given a discharge warning. On
31 July 2004, he was assigned semi-annual (SA) proficiency and
conduct marks of 4.0 and 1.0, respectively. On 17 September 2004, he
departed Iraq with his unit. On 16 December 2004, he was convicted
by a summary court-martial of consuming alcohol while underage and
another offense that is not contained in the record. During the
period 6 July 2005 to 29 January 2006, he was deployed again to Iraq
with his infantry unit. On 1 October 2006, he was promoted to pay
grade E-3. On 19 June 2007, a service record entry was made which
stated that he was not recommended for reenlistment due to his
conduct mark average not being within retention guidelines and was
being assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 2 July 2007, he was
released from active duty under honorable conditions due to
completion of required active service and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code. At that time his awards included the Combat
Action Ribbon, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon with one star, Iraq
Campaign Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and
Expeditionary Medal, National Defense Service Medal, and a letter of
appreciation.

ad. Attached to enclosure (1) is a memorandum from Headquarters
Marine Corps, Performance Evaluation Review Branch, which states, in

part, as follows:

... [Petitioner's] service record has been reviewed
and it has been determined that at the time of
separation he was assigned a reenlistment code of
RE-4, which means that he was not recommended for
reenlistment. The reenlistment code was correctly
assigned and was based on his overall record...

...{Petitioner] was informed that that [sic] he
was not eligible for reenlistment and that his
reenlistment code of RE-4 would be assigned.

The disciplinary portion shows that [Petitioner]
received three [NUJP's and a SCM]...

After a review of all relevant information, this
Headquarters concurs in the professional
evaluation of [Petitioner's] qualifications for
reenlistment at the time of his separation...

e. In his application, Petitioner states in essence that he
was given an RE-4 reenlistment code because his proficiency and
conduct marks were below 4.0, but there was an administrative error
that led to this mistake. He further states that he was assigned
proficiency and conduct marks on two occasions during July 2004, and
he should have only been assigned marks on one occasion during that
month. He further states that he had no disciplinary actions after
December 2004, his conduct improved, and he served a second tour of
duty in Iraq before he was released from active duty under honorable
conditions.
£. Regulations state that Marines serving on active duty in pay
grade E-4 and below will receive SA proficiency and conduct marks on
31 January and 31 July, and Marines who have received proficiency and
conduct marks within the prior 90 days will receive SA proficiency
and conduct marks of "not available" (NA). Regulations also state
that a Marine's reenlistment prerequisite is to have a minimum
average in-service proficiency and conduct mark of 4.0 and this will
not be waived. Regulations further state that basic reenlistment
prerequisites for a Marine is to have no court-martial convictions
and no more than two NUP's during his/her current enlistment
contract, but that those prerequisites may be waived. Regulations
further state that a Marine may be assigned an RE-3C reenlistment
code when directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps or when not
eligible and a disqualifying factor is not covered by any other code.

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 his SA proficiency and conduct
marks reported on 31 July 2004, are erroneous since he had received
marks on 2 July 2004, and as such marks of NA should have been
reported. The Board further finds that excluding the erroneous SA
marks, his in-service proficiency and conduct mark average is 4.2 and
4.0, respectively, which meets the reenlistment prerequisite. The
Board also notes that the service record entry dated 19 June 2007,
states that he was not recommended for reenlistment due to his
conduct mark not being within retention guidelines, but the entry
does not specify any other reason. The Board also finds that his
disciplinary actions are waiverable reenlistment prerequisites and
notes that they occurred within about a ten month period of time and
further finds that he served without incident during his last 30
months of active duty. The Board also considers his two deployments
to Iraq, awards, and present status in the Marine Corps Reserve.
Therefore, the Board finds that the SA proficiency and conduct marks
that were reported on 31 July 2004, should be removed and corrected
to show that NA marks were reported on that date, and that his
reenlistment code be changed to RE-3C vice the RE-4 that was actually
assigned on 2 July 2007.

RECOMMENDATION:

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that he
was assigned an RE-3C reenlistment code on 2 July 2007, vice the
RE-4.

b. That Petitioner's naval record be further corrected in the
Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS) by deleting the SA marks
dated 31 July 2004, and report marks of NA for that occasion.
c. That Petitioner's naval record be further corrected by
removing any service record pages and MCTFS printouts that show the
SA marks of 4.0 and 1.9, respectively, that were reported on
31 July 2004.

d. 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.

e. 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 purposes, 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.

Gar} Doogh
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN J.¥ GEORGE

Recorder Acting Recorder

5. The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your review and

action.
en

W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Dire

Reviewed and approved:

Qa. COL

AZ-AV- 0%

ROBERT T. CALI
Assistant General Counsel

(Manpower and Reserve Affairs)