DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0 TRG
Docket No: 6673-01
13 February 2001
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
(b) BUPERSINST 1900.8
(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 Naval Reserve filed an application
with this Board requesting a change in the RE-4 reenlistment code
issued to her on 14 January 1997.
The Board, consisting of Mr. Brezna, Mr. Pfeiffer and Ms.
2.
Hare, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on
5 February 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that
the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record.
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
Documentary material considered by
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 3 February
1994 at age 18 and reported for three years of active duty on 25
April 1994.
Although her record is incomplete, the available
record shows that in the performance evaluation for the period
ending 25 January 1996, she was assigned a marginal marks of 2.0
However, she was assigned satisfactory
in military bearing.
marks of 3.0 in three categories and excellent marks of 4.0 in
two other categories, and was recommended for promotion and
retention in the Navy.
There are no further entries in the
record.
The DD Form 214 shows that she was honorably discharged
on 14 January 1997 by reason of "physical standards", separation
program designator (SPD) of
reenlistment code.
"JFT" and assigned an RE-4
d.
As indicated, there is no explanation in the record to
show why Petitioner was discharged because of her failure to meet
However, her separation physical indicates
physical standards.
Weight problems
that she was
could explain the marginal mark of 2.0 in military bearing.
67" tall and weighed 198 pounds.
e.
Reference (b) states that individuals separated with an
RE-3F, RE-3T or
SPD of JFT may be assigned reenlistment code of
RE-4.
An RE-3F reenlistment code is assigned when an individual
has failed the physical readiness test and an RE-3T reenlistment
code is assigned when an individual is discharged because of
obesity.
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 the separation physical entry
concerning her weight provides the only information concerning
the possible reason for her discharge.
duty was satisfactory and it appears that a weight problem was
the reason for discharge,
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 reenlistment code.
This code will alert recruiters that there is a problem which
must be resolved before enlistment can be authorized, but will
not preclude consideration for an enlistment waiver.
Since her performance of
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.
on 14 January 1997 she was assigned an
vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
RE-ST reenlistment code
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.
2
ROBERT D.
Recorder
ZSALMAN
ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
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
has been approved by the Board on
authority of reference (a),
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
1
3
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 07625-01
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. At that time he was not recommended for reenlistment and was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner's naval record so that all future reviewers will...
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 | CY2010 | 00143-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN Docket No: 00143-10 13 October 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records TO: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Cr QR USY, Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a Former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting a change in her RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. ...