DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TUR
Docket No: 3652-10

28 March 2011

 

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

Subj:

Ref: (a) 1.6 U.S.€¢ Ls S2

Fncl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments

 

(2) Case summary with advisory opinion (AO)
(3) Subject's naval record

1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, filed enclosure (1)

with this Board requesting recharacterization oO
change of his narrative reason for separation and reenlistment
code, and removal of all derogatory material from his record. He

further requested that his record be corrected to reflect

advancement to paygrade E-4.

Gattis, Spain, and Zsalman,

2. The Board, consisting of Messrs.
error and injustice on ee

reviewed Petitioner's allegations of
March 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that
partial corrective action, as indicated below, should be taken on

the available evidence of record. Documentary material
f the enclosures, naval

considered by the Board consisted ©
records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In
addition, the Board considered the AO provided by the Navy

a copy of which

Personnel Command (NPC) dated 28 February 2011,

is enclosed.

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
inj ice finds as

to Petitioner's allegations oO

follows:

a.- Betore 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 enclosure (1) was not filed in a
timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive Lhe

statute of limitations and review.
Petitioner, while located in Marion, SC, enlisted in the
n 4 February 1992 at age 20 and began a period of

active duty training on 4 November 1992. He served without
disciplinary incident and was advanced to paygrade E-3/DKSN. On
21 February 2000, he was honorably released from active duty

training.

Cc.

Navy Reserve ©

d. It appears that on 26 February 2002, while located in

Charlotte, NC, Petitiotfer reenlisted in the Navy Reserve. The
cipation until 1 July 2002. On

record reflects satisfactory parti
med to be his failure to

16 July 2002, after what was presu
continue participating in drills, an attempt was made, via mail,

to notify him of pending administrative separation action by
reason of unsatisfactory participation. In this regard, there is
no evidence in the record to reflect that confirmation of the

notification attempt was successful. In other words, there is no
signed and/or acknowledged receipt that he was notified of the

pending administrative separation.

the discharge authority at the Naval and
Marine Corps Reserve Center (NMCRC), Charlotte, NC, directed
discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory
participation sn the Ready Reserve. On 2 October 2002
Petitioner, while serving in paygrade F-4/UT3, was issued a

general discharge.

e, Subsequently,

 

NPC (PERS-913), directed NMCRC to

f. On 16 December 2002,
provide the administrative processing documentation in support of

Petitioner’s discharge.

g. An AO from NPC (PERS-91) recommends the recharacterization

of Petitioner’s discharge and a change of his reenlistment code.
The AO, however, does not recommend that he be advanced to
paygrade E-4 because he did not successfully complete a program
that would have permanently placed him in that paygrade. The AO
lthough his command executed a local

stated, in part, that a

administrative separation on the basis of allegedly failed

participation in regularly scheduled drills, the official record
sed absences had

contains no evidence that nine or more unexcu
been accumulated. The separation package contains documentation
that reflects “authorized absences” for missed drills vice

“unexcused” absences. It appears that he enlisted through the

Navy's Construction Basic-Veteran (CB-VET) Program and as a

member of this program, his paygrade of E-4 would have been
temporary and only made permanent upon the successful completion

of the program requirements. It is not likely that he would have
been able to complete the program requirements given his dxill
history. Based on the lack of supporting documentation in his
official military personnel file, it is recommended that the
characterization of his service be changed to reflect “honorable”
and the reenlistment code be changed to reflect an “RE-1”
reenlistment code.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of the AO, the Board concludes that
Petitioner's request warrants partial favorable action.

The Board notes Petitioner's prior honorable service and overall
satisfactory record of service after his reenlistment. In
addition, the Board considers the PERS-913 AO and substantially
concurs with the comments and recommendations contained therein.
Further, the Board concludes that although PERS-913 aid not
recommend a change of the narrative reason for separation, the
reason for separation should be changed to “Secretarial
Authority” to support the assignment of an RE-1 reenlistment
code. In this regard, the Board concludes that the record should
be corrected to reflect an “honorable discharge by reason of
secretarial authority, and an assigned RE-1 reenlistment code”
which is more appropriate than the general discharge by reason of
unsatisfactory participation, and the assigned RE-4 reenlistment
code now of record.

 

 

The Board further concurs with the PERS-913 AO regarding denial
of advancement to paygrade E-4 since the record clearly reflects
that Petitioner did not successfully complete the CB-VET program
as required for permanent advancement to paygrade E-4.

 

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an
injustice warranting the following partial corrective action.

RECOMMENDATION :

 

a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing
the general characterization of service, assigned on 2 October
2002, te Honorable.

b. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing
the unsatisfactory participation narrative reason for separation,
assigned on 2 October 2002, to Secretarial Authority.

c. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing
the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 2 October 2002, to
RE-1.
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 purpose, with no cross reference being made a
part of Petitioner's naval record.

f. That no further relief be granted.

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 723.6(c), 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.

Gorn) Drongr
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN 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.

LO Qen sah

W. DEAN PFE
Fxecutive Diyedgtio