DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 4149-01
1 November 2001
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
RECORD OF
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) 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 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 15
December 1998.
The Board, consisting of Mr. Brezna, Mr.
2.
Schnittman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 24 October 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
evidence.of record.
Mackey and Ms.
Documentary material
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
3.
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 14 August 1992 for
six years and subsequently extended that enlistment for 12
months.
Reserve.
He had three years of prior active service in the Naval
d.
On 22 March 1993 Petitioner was counseled concerning his
failure to meet physical readiness test (PRT) standards because
he exceeded the weight standards.
be 24%.
26 June 1995.
punishment for forgery of the commanding officer's signature with
His body fat was indicated to
There are no performance evaluations in the record after
On‘19 November 1996 he received nonjudicial
intent to defraud.
However, the punishment imposed was only an oral reprimand.
The details of this offense are unknown.
e.
During 1998, Petitioner was counseled on three occasions
25%, 28% and
His
concerning his weight problem and resulting PRT failures.
30%, respectively. On
body fat was indicated to be
13 November 1998 he was notified of separation processing due to
his failure to achieve prescribed physical readiness standards,
and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as
In connection with
evidenced by the NJP of 19 November 1996.
this processing, he elected to waive his right to have his case
heard by an administrative discharge board.
directing discharge, the commanding officer stated, in part, as
follows:
In his letter
(Petitioner) has been struggling with his weight since
According to his Risk Factor Screening
October 1997.
folder, (he) has had weight problems dating back to
He (has) been given every opportunity to
July 1992.
get within the Navy's height/weight standards and has
been unsuccessful.
nonjudicial punishment for misconduct due to commission
of a serious offense, the primary reason for
administrative separation processing is due to weight
control failure.
Honorable discharge is warranted in this case.
I do not believe an Other Than
Although, (he) was awarded
Petitioner was honorably discharged on 15 December 1998 by reason
He was not recommended for
of weight control failure.
reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
f.
Petitioner has submitted evidence showing that he is now
a member of the Alabama National Guard and is serving in an
excellent manner.
so that he can enlist in the Regular Army.
examiner that he does not have copies of his performance
evaluations.
He desires a change in the reenlistment code
He has informed the
Q-
The Board is aware that regulations allow for the
assignment of an RE-3T or an RE-4 reenlistment code when an
individual is discharged due to weight control failure.
reenlistment code means an individual is recommended for
reenlistment except of the disqualifying factor of his excess
weight.
An RE-3T
CONCLUSION:
2
The Board notes that there are no details of the forgery
However,
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
offense for which he received NJP on 19 November 1996.
he received minimal punishment and was not processed for
discharge at that time, and the misconduct was only used when
there was another reason for discharge.
officer stated that the primary reason for separation was weight
control failure.
Although Petitioner's performance evaluations
are not available after June 1995 it appears that he was serving
in a satisfactory manner.
The Board also notes his subsequent
excellent service in the National Guard and his desire to enlist
in the Regular Army.
concludes that no useful purpose is now served by the RE-4
reenlistment code issued on 15 December 1998, and it should be
This
changed to the less restrictive RE-3T reenlistment code.
code will alert recruiters that there is a problem which must be
resolved before enlistment can be authorized.
Given the circumstances, the Board
Further, the commanding
The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings
should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all future
reviewers will understand the reason for the change in the
reenlistment code.
RECOMMENDATION:
a.
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by issuing a
Form 215 to show that on 15 December 1998 he was assigned an
3T reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of
record.
DD
RE-
That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner's
b.
naval record.
It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
4.
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. ZSALMAN
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 Regulations, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
3
authority of reference (a),
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
has been approved by the Board on
Executive Director
4
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07428-01
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 the RE-4 reenlistment code issued on 30 May 1997 be changed to RE-1. As indicated, there is no basis in the Given the circumstances, the Board concludes that The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08458-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. g. Petitioner was then advised that administrative separation action was being initiated by reasons of weight control failure as evidence by his failure of three PRT1s within a four year period. That Petitioner's naval record by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 15 August 1997, to RE-3T b.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06312-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the United States Naval Reserve applied to this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show a better characterization of service than the separation under honorable conditions and that her reenlistment code be changed. The majority notes that there are no performance evaluations in the record after 31 January 1995. In addition, the Board notes that she was not discharged on 9 January 1997 as is usually...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03282-01
d. The Board notes that the SPD code of GFT is in error because that code is only assigned when an individual is being discharged for failure of physical standards based on an approved recommendation of an administrative discharge board Petitioner was not eligible for an ADB and such a board was not convened. This code will The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reason for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07322-98
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 MEH:mh Docket No: 7322-98 25 May 1999 This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 May 1999. equests repayment of tive Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) recouped...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02813-00
letter of 31 October 1997, that he could elect or waive his right to an administrative discharge board (ADB) and that he could By return endorsement, dated 1 November consult with counsel. Accordingly, Petitioner's record should be corrected to show that he was not discharged on 12 January 1998, but continued to serve Concerning the characterization of service, the Board notes Therefore, the Board concludes Petitioner's waiver of 2 on active duty until the earliest possible date he could...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00165-99
disciplinary action during two enlistments and he was not recommended for retention only because he exceeded body fat standards at the expiration of his enlistment. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code, assigned on 18 October 1992, to RE-3T. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07731-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TJR Docket No: 7731-01 8 November 2001 From: To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF' ,l. Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pfeiffer reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 6 November 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00380-01
RE-3T reenlistment code means that An CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable In this regard, the Board notes that Petitioner had no action. disciplinary actions in more than nine years of active service, his performance was consistently rated as meeting standards, and he was not recommended for retention only because he failed to meet weight control assignment of the most unduly harsh and he...
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...