DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
	WASHINGTON DC 20370-5H00	

		SJN
Docket No: 08263-06
15 March 2007

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

Subj:	REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF

Ref:	(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) DD Form 149 with attachments
(2)	Case Summary
(3)	Subjects 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 a change in his reenlistment code.

2.	The Board, consisting of Mr.
reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 14 December 2004 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 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 on 24 May 1993 at age 19. Subsequently, during recruit training, a medical evaluation determined that he had a knee problem that existed prior to entering the Naval service.

	d.	On 3 June 1993 the commanding officer (CO) recommended that Petitioner be discharged with an entry-level separation by reason of erroneous entry due to the diagnosed orthopedic problems. Petitioner waived all of his procedural rights and he was discharged with an entry level separation on 9 June 1993.

e.	With his application, Petitioner submitted a medical examination that states that his current health is satisfactory.

f.	The reenlistment code of RE-4 means that Petitioner is not recommended for retention. However, he could have been assigned a code of RE-3E meaning that he was enlisted in error.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action.

In this regard, the Board notes Petitioner’s brief but unblemished period of military service and concludes that no useful purpose was served by assignment of the most restrictive reenlistment code of RE-4, and assignment of the RE-3E code more accurately reflects the quality of his service.

RECOMMENDATION:

a.	That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 9 June 1993 Petitioner was issued a RE-3E reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code actually issued on that date.

b.	That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.

c.	That upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner’s application was received on 17 January
2007.

4. 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.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN	ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
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.

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
	Executive Director