DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 13656-10
28 January 2011
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
Salt ali it Ee ee
Ref: (a} 20 U.S.¢. TS52
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 Ghd
Board requesting that her RE-4 reenlistment code be changed.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Clemmons, Mr. Garst, and Ms.
Wilcher, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 19 January 2011 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 3 April 2001 at age 20
and served without disciplinary incident.
d. During the period from 7 to 16 August 2001, Petitioner
submitted a written request for separation due to parenthood
because she could not comply with the Navy's Family Care (NFC)
Policy Program. In this regard, she stated that she could not be
deployed because she did not have anyone to care for her
children. Subsequently, she signed a certificate which stated
that she could not comply with the NFC Policy Program.
e. The discharge authority approved the foregoing request and
directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of
erroneous entry due to parenthood as evidenced by failure to
complete family care plan arrangements. At that time Petitioner
was not recommended for retention or reenlistment.
f. On 30 August 2001, while serving in paygrade E-1,
Petitioner was issued an uncharacterized entry level separation
and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
g. In Petitioner’s application, she states that she now has
adequate child care arrangements, but the assigned RE-4
reenlistment code is hindering her efforts to enlist in the Army
National Guard.
h. An RE-3B reenlistment code may be assigned to Sailors
separated due to parenthood, pregnancy, and/or childbirth. This
code may not bar enlistment, but requires that a waiver be
obtained. Recruiting personnel are responsible for determining
whether an individual meets the standards for reenlistment, and
whether or not a request for a waiver of a reenlistment code is
feasible. A Sailor separated for this reason may also receive an
RE-4 reenlistment code, which means that the Sailor is not
recommended for reenlistment.
CONCLUSION :
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
The Board notes Petitioner's overall satisfactory record, to
include the lack of any disciplinary infractions. Further, the
Board believes that since she was solely separated by reason of
parenthood and the nonrecommendation for reenlistment was too
harsh. Since an RE-3B reenlistment code is authorized by
regulatory guidance for a Sailor who is separated for this
reason, the Board concludes that an RE-3B reenlistment code is
more appropriate than the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
RECOMMENDATION :
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing
the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 30 August 2001, to
RE-3B.
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. 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.
ROBERT D. ASALMAN eRIAN 3. QcrorcE
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10755-09
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her reenlistment code be changed. Nevertheless, she was administratively processed for separation by reason of parenthood due to her inability to comply with the NFC program. On 23 February 2004 the discharge authority, Navy Personnel Command (NPC), directed a reenlistment code of RE-3B, or a RE-4, if warranted by the service record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05172-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR Docket No: 5172-08 5 February 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. e. On 6 February 2008 the discharge authority directed separation with a characterization of service warranted her service record and an RE-3B reenlistment code. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07126-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. e. In August 1988 Petitioner was administratively processed for separation by reason of pregnancy/childbirth due to her inability to comply with the NFC policy program. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing ~ the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 5 August 1988, to RE-3B.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06341-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 ELP Docket No 6341-01 29 January 2002 From: To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 0 Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 Encl: (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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07171-00
The Board also notes that even though Petitioner's trait averages differ on his enlisted performance record and his performance evaluation, both marks exceed the required average of 2.0 which is needed for a The Board further fully honorable characterization of service. notes Petitioner's only performance evaluation of record in which he was recommended for retention and promotion and believes that the sole reason for separation was due to him being nondeployable because he could not find...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00327-09
Pursuant to the provisions of reference {a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her RE-4 reenlistment code be changed. Since an RE-3B reenlistment code is authorized by regulatory _ guidance for a Sailor who is separated by reason of .parenthood, the Board concludes that the interest of justice would better be better served by changing Petitioner’s RE-4 reenlistment code to Re-3B rather than the RE-4 now of record. That...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05493-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 5493-01 2 November 2001 From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF IIL (a) Title 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 filed enclosure (1) with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01493-08
The Board, consisting of Mr. ¥ Ms. MMe, and Ms. * reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 30 September 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. In Petitioner’s case, her RE-4 reenlistment code was not warranted based on her overall evaluations. Therefore, the Board concludes that an RE-3B reenlistment code which is authorized by regulatory guidance for individuals...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06232-01
The majority further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner' s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reasons for the assignment of the RE-3B reenlistment code. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 18 December 1998 she was assigned an RE-3B reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record. Since Petitioner has been treated no differently than others who failed to advance to E-3, the minority could...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06423-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00TRGDocket No:6423-0722 May 2008From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OFRef: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that her RE-4 reenlistment code be changed.2. Petitioner’s case was considered by the Naval...