DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
BOARD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.5100
TRG
Docket No: 4243-01
11 October 2001
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
REVIEW OF NAVAL 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 that he was
assigned a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment
code assigned on 3 November 1995.
The Board, consisting of Mr. Adams, Mr. Pfeiffer and Mr.
2.
Morgan, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 10 October 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
Documentary material considered by
available evidence of record.
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
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.
Although it appears that Petitioner's application was
not filed in a timely manner,
waive the statute of limitations and review the application on
its merits.
it is in the interest of justice to
C .
Petitioner enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 28 February
1990 at age 19 and reported for 36 months of active duty on 4
September 1990.
On 24 August 1995 he was notified of
for another 26 months.
separation processing due to his failure to maintain physical
readiness standards, because he had failed three physical
readiness tests within a four year period.
Subsequently, he agreed to remain on active duty
In connection with
In the performance evaluation for the period 1 July
this processing, he elected to waive his procedural rights.
Subsequently, the commanding officer directed an honorable
discharge.
to 26 October 1995 he as assigned an adverse marks of 2.8 in
military bearing and for the overall evaluation.
assigned marks of 3.8 and 3.6 in four other categories.
honorably discharged on 3 November 1995.
not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
At that time, he was
He was
However, he was
d.
Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3T or an
RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is separated due to
failure to maintain physical standards.
An RE-3T reenlistment
means that the individual is recommended for reenlistment except
for that disqualifying factor.
An RE-4 reenlistment code means
the individual is not recommended for reenlistment.
CONCLUSION:
The Board notes the final performance evaluation which
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
shows that Petitioner performed his duties in an excellent manner
and he only received the adverse 2.8 marks because of his
physical readiness test failures.
that, in retrospect, Petitioner should have been recommended for
reenlistment except for the disqualifying factor.
RE-4 reenlistment code issued on 3 November 1995 should now be
changed to RE-3T.
a problem which must be resolved before reenlistment can be
authorized.
This code will alert recruiters that there is
Therefore, the Board concludes
Therefore, the
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:
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by issuing a DD
a.
Form 215 to show that on 3 November 1995 he was assigned an RE-3T
reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
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
2
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
.
._
.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
Acting Recorder
Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
5.
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 | CY2002 | 06887-00
"completion of required active f. Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-3T reenlistment code to individuals ineligible to reenlist upon expiration of enlistment due to their failure to meet weight standards. disciplinary actions in nearly 10 years of service and was not recommended for retention only because he failed to meet weight control standards. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by assigned on 22 November chang- 1995, to ing the RE-4 reenlistment code, RE-3T.
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 | CY2002 | 03386-02
obtain copies of documents supporting g* On 12 August 1997, the commanding officer forwarded the administrative separation action to the discharge authority recommending separation due to weight control failure, with characterization of service as warranted by her service record. Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-3T or RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals separated by reason of weight control failure. That Petitioner's naval record by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code,...
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 | 04149-01
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. Schnittman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 24 October 2001 and, pursuant to its...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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...