DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N OF N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TRG
Docket No: 7625-01
6 March 2002
From :
To :
Chairman,
Secretary
Board for Correction of Naval Records
of the Navy
Sub j :
Ref:
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl :
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
(3) Subject Is naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
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 now of record.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Lippolis, Mr. Geisler and Ms.
LeBlanc, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 26 February 2002 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. Although it appears that Petitioner's application was
not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to
waive the statute of limitations and review the application on
its merits .
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 21 July 1994 at age
18. During the period from 19 April 1996 to 25 April 1997 he
failed to meet the weight standards on three occasions. In the
performance evaluation for the period 16 January 1997 to 15 July
1997, he was assign'ed a mark of 1.0 in the category of military
bearing/character and was not recommended for retention or
promotion. The evaluation comments state that the adverse mark
was assigned because of his weight control failure. However, the
comments also state that he was an integral part of his division
and he accomplished all tasks with little or no supervision.
d. On 17 November 1997 Petitioner was notified of discharge
processing by reason of weight control failure. In connection
with this processing, he elected to waive his procedural rights.
On 20 November 1997, the commanding officer directed an honorable
discharge by reason of weight control failure stating that "he
has the potential to become an outstanding sailor". Petitioner
was honorably discharged on 4 December 1997. At that time he was
not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
e. Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3T or an
RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason
of weight control failure.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. The Board notes that Petitioner served in an excellent
manner for over three years and the only reason for his discharge
was weight control failure. Given the circumstances, the Board
concludes that no useful purpose is now served by the RE-4
reenlistment code and it should now be changed to the less
restrictive RE-3T code. This code will alert recruiters that
there is a problem which must be resolved before reenlistment can
be authorized.
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 to show that
that on 4 December 1997 he was assigned an RE-3T reenlistment
code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
b. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in 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
c o m p l e t e record of t h e B o a r d ' s p r o c e e d i n g s i n t h e above e n t i t l e d
matter.
ROBERT D . ZSALMAN
R e c o r d e r
ALAN E. GO
A c t i n g R e c o r d e r
5 . P u r s u a n t t o t h e d e l e g a t i o n o f a u t h o r i t y set o u t i n S e c t i o n
6 ( e ) o f t h e revised P r o c e d u r e s of t h e Board f o r C o r r e c t i o n o f
Naval R e c o r d s (32 Code of F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n s , S e c t i o n 7 2 3 . 6 ( e ) )
a n d h a v i n g a s s u r e d c o m p l i a n c e w i t h i t s p r o v i s i o n s , i t i s h e r e b y
a n n o u n c e d t h a t t h e f o r e g o i n g c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n , t a k e n u n d e r t h e
a u t h o r i t y of r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , h a s b e e n a p p r o v e d by t h e Board on
b e h a l f of t h e S e c r e t a r y of t h e Navy.
'\t...-j 3.J-
F-
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
E x e c u t i v e Director
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 | CY1999 | 01714-99
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E N A V Y BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 N A W ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 1714-99 7 October 1999 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To : Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a an enlisted member of the United States Marine Corps Reserve filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that the RE-30 reenlistment code assigned to him on release from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02338-03
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To : Secretary of the Navy Docket No: 2338-03 12 September 2003 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL R E C O R D S 2 N A V Y A N N E X W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0 T ~ G Subj : REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF - Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member in the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07315-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals separated by reason of a diagnosed personality disorder. Absent such evidence, the Board concluded that the reason for discharge and separation code were appropriate.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02040-99
The Board, consisting of Mr. Mathews, Mr. Dunn and Ms. McCormick, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 13 July 1999 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. d. The advisory opinion at enclosure (2) from Headquarters Marine Corps (MMSR-6J) recommends that Petitioner's record be corrected to show that he transferred to the Retired Reserve on 1 January 1999 vice being...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03355-99
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. However, petitioner d i ; l not initia1l.y reenlist under the STAR program, because at the ti!r!,: of r=.enlistrnent, the STS rate was not. T h i s i s a n a d v i s o r y memorandum t o r e f e r e n c e ( a ) f o r t h e u s e by t h e Board f o r C o r r e c t i o n of Naval Records ( P N R ) o n p .
AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00030
Recommend t h a t respondent be separated with an honorable discharge, w i t h or without an o f f e r of P & R; or c. Direct t h e respondent be separated with a g e n e r a l discharge, w i t h or without an o f f e r of P & R. 6. The authority for this action is AFR 39-10, para exceeding weight standards. Copies of the documents to be forwarded t o the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04637-01
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for duty at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 0 2 M A Y 1 9 9 6 DATE MEMBER'S STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING: I UNDERSTAND THAT THE RECOMMENDED F I N D I N G OF F I T FOR DUTY I S S U B J E C T...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07368-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show reinstatement on active duty or a change in the reenlistment code. However, after reviewing the Navy's evaluation, the Board concludes that even if Petitioner did not have a personality disorder, his problems were sufficiently severe to warrant discharge. The Board notes that portion of the DVA evaluation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04278-02
In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC office having cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner's request to strike his failure of selection for promotion has commented to the effect that this request has merit and warrants favorable action. The petitioned fitness report contained competitive concerns that may have resulted in the failure of selection. Since the comments in the petitioned report likely contributed to Lieutenant colon@- selection, we recommend approval...