DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO

TJR
									    Docket No: 8747-07 
										18 June 2008

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

Subj:	REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF EX-EN3
	
Ref:	(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
(b)	OPNAVINST 1160.5C
(c)	BUPERSINST 1900.8A

End:	(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 reenlistment code be changed.

2 The Board consisting of Messrs and reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 17 June 2008 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.	Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 26 April 2001 at the age of 21. He served without disciplinary incident and was advanced to paygrade E—4.

d.	Petitioner was awarded a Good Conduct Medal, National
Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal,
Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Navy Unit
Commendation, Battle “E” Ribbon, and Sea Service Deployment
Ribbon.

e.	Petitioner was recommended for retention until 25 April 2006, when he failed to meet physical fitness assessment (PFA) standards. In this regard, he was advised, in part, that if he had met the Navy’s body fat composition standards, he would be highly competitive and that he would make an outstanding contribution to any organization.

f.	On 25 April 2006 Petitioner was honorably released from active duty upon completion of his required active service. At that time he received a separation performance evaluation in which he was not recommended for retention, and as a result, he was assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

g.	Reference (b) authorizes the issuance of an RE-4 reenlistment code to Sailors who have completed their enlistment and are serving in paygrade E-4 at the time of their release from active duty. The assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code under these circumstances means that a Sailor is not eligible or recommended for reenlistment. Reference (c), however, authorizes the issuance of an RE-3F reenlistment code for a Sailor, such as Petitioner, who was not recommended for retention due to PFA failures.

CONCLUSION:

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

The Board’s decision is based on Petitioner’s overall satisfactory service in which he served without disciplinary infractions, and received a Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Navy Unit Commendation, Battle “E” Ribbon, and Sea Service Deployment Ribbon.

Although Petitioner was not recommended for retention, the Board notes that this nonrecommendation was based solely on his failure to meet the Navy’s body fat composition standards and/or PFA tests. Since an RE-3F reenlistment code is authorized for a Sailor who is separated upon completion of required active service but not recommended for retention due to failure of PFA tests, the Board believes that an RE-3F is now the most appropriate reenlistment code for Petitioner’s situation. Accordingly, the record should be corrected to show that he was assigned such a code.

2
RECONNENDATION:

a.	That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned an RE-3F reenlistment code on 25 April 2006 vice the RE-4 reenlistment code actually assigned 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.

c.	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 in a confidential file maintained for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of 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 complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.

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.

							
		W.	DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director