DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SJN
Docket No: 05010-10
24 March 2011
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Los Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW ¥ ae RECORD OF Gc chy
Ref: (a) “LO UvS.G. i552
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 this
Board requesting that his RE-4 reentry code be changed.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr. Gattis, Mr. Zsalman, and
Mr. Spain, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 22 March 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
Eollows:
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 enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner,
it is in the interest of justice to waive the statue of
limitations and review the application on its merits.
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of
active duty on 31 October 2005. On 16 November 2005, he was
diagnosed as having asthma. At that time he was recommended for
an entry level separation due to an erroneous enlistment.
Subsequently, he was notified of proposed action for an
administrative separation by reason of failed medical/physical
procurement standards. On 22 November 2005, his commanding
officer directed that he be separated with an entry level
separation. At that time he was assigned an RE-4 reentry code.
He could have been processed for separation by reason of a
condition that is not a disability but which interfered with the
performance of duty, specifically, the diagnosed asthma. “Had he
been so processed, an RE-3G reentry code could have been
assigned. However, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an
individual is separated due to failed medical/physical
procurement standards.
d. With his application, Petitioner submitted a report from
a hospital respiratory therapy department dated 8 March 2010,
stating that he did not have asthma, and that he wants to
reenlist.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
Although Petitioner was properly processed for separation by
reason of an erroneous enlistment and assigned an RE-4 reentry
code, which means that he is not recommended for reenlistment,
he could have been processed for a condition not a disability,
and been assigned an RE-3G reentry code, meaning that he had a
condition that interfered with his performance of duty. This
reentry code may not prohibit reenlistment, but requires that a
waiver be obtained from recruiting personnel who are responsible
for reviewing the feasibility of satisfying the Navy’s personnel
manning goals by determining whether or not an individual meets
the standards for reenlistment. If he wishes to reenlist, re-
affiliate, or be reinstated in the Navy, he will need to contact
the Navy Recruiting Command via his nearest recruiting facility.
The Board therefore concludes that the record should be corrected
to show the he was assigned an RE-3G reentry code as an exception
to policy.
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an
injustice warranting the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that
on 29 November 2005, the narrative reason for his discharge be
changed to “condition, not a disability” vice “failed
medical/physical procurement standards” now of record, a
separation code of “JFV” vice “JFW" now of record, and assigned
an RE-3G reentry code vice the RE-4 now of record actually issued
on that date.
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.
ec. 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 ina
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.
Axon}, ior
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN BRIAN J. GEORGE
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.
\
. DEAN PFERF
Executive Dil
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6862 13
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, to change his reentry code of RE-4 (not recommended for retention). The Board, consisting of Ms. Henkel and Messrs. Rothlein and Zsalman, reviewed allegations of error and injustice on 23 July 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that relief should be granted. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3780 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting: that his RE-4 {not recommended for reenlistment) reentry code be changed. The Board, consisting of Mr. Grover, Mr. Rothleim, and Mr. Clemmons, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and ‘injustice on 10 December 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the partial corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04200-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlistment member in the Navy filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 14 December 2000. the Board concludes that no Given the circumstances, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3174 14
oOn 7 December 2007, he was counselled regarding being in a Class III (non- deployable) dental status and warned that unless he corrected his dental issues, he was subject to administrative separation. RECOMMENDATION: a: That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 27 August 2008, he was issued an RE-3G reentry code vice the RE-4 now of record. a Recorder 5.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0533 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the narrative reason for separation (Fraudulent entry into military service (other)) and the RE-4 reentry code issued on 17 February 2009, be upgraded. The Board, consisting of Mr. Bey, Ms. Lapinski, and Mr. Storz, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice © on 12 March 2014, and, pursuant to its...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02489-07
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 his reenlistment code.2. With his application, Petitioner states that when asked in recruit training if he ever had asthma prior to entering the service, he initially circled “NO”, but when he was diagnosed with asthma, he changed his answer to “YES”. In the doctor’s letter he stated, in part, that after reviewing his records, Petitioner...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07200-06
e. Regulations allow for the assignment of his RE-3E reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment. When an individual is discharged by reason of “Failed Medical Physical Procurement Standards” the only authorized code is an RE-4 reenlistment code.CONCLUSION:Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. This code will alert recruiters that there is a problem which...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08474-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS | 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100CRS Docket No: 8474-09 24 August 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records TO: Secretary of the Navy Subj: FORME T
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03188-09
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting her naval record be corrected by changing the reentry code she was assigned on 7 October 2008. The Board, consisting of Messrs. i, oi and —y, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 8 April 2009 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Petitioner's naval record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10411-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting his naval record be corrected by changing the reentry code he was assigned on 15 March 2007. The Board, consisting of Messrs #3 ene, and Ms. MMM TTS oF) 08 Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 17 December 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That Petitioner's naval record be...