Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022241
Original file (20100022241.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  14 April 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100022241 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his request that his Reentry Eligibility (RE) code of "RE-3" be changed to "RE-1."  He now also requests that his Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of "LBK" (Completion of Required Active Service) be changed to "JBK" (Expiration of Term of Service [ETS]) or some other suitable code.

2.  The applicant states that he was enrolled in the Army Weight Control Program (AWCP) and met his weight standard on 4 August 2005 in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 600-9 (AWCP).

   a.  He states he was 73 inches tall and weighed 195 pounds, which was under the screening table weight of 200 pounds for male Soldiers of his height and age.  He adds he did not have to be "taped" for body fat, but he was anyway. Afterwards, his Noncommissioned Officer in Charge informed him that he would be removed from the AWCP and the remedial physical training (PT) program.

   b.  He states he learned from the original consideration of his case that the "Flag" for the AWCP was still in place when he was separated.  However, he notes that he received an Army Commendation Medal when he was separated from active duty, which would not have been possible if he was still flagged.

3.  The applicant provides copies of a DA Form 5500-R (Body Fat Content Worksheet - Male), DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), and
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090008040, on 20 October 2009.

2.  The applicant enlisted and entered active duty in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 6 years on 12 January 2000.  Upon completion of training he was awarded military occupational specialty 15B (Aircraft Power Plant Repairman).
He was promoted to corporal/pay grade E-4 on 12 September 2000.

3.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 11 January 2006 under the provisions of AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), chapter 4 (Separation for Expiration of Service Obligation), based on completion of required active service and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement).  It also shows in:

   a.  item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), in pertinent part, the "Army Commendation Medal
(3rd Award)";

   b.  item 26 (Separation Code) the entry "LBK"; and

   c.  item 27 (Reentry Code) the entry "3."

4.  The applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR on 21 February 2006.

5.  A DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States), dated 29 December 2009, that the applicant completed for the purpose of his enlistment in the USAR shows in:

   a.  section III (Other Personal Data), item 24 (Previous Military Service or Employment with the U.S. Government), blocks a and b, the applicant indicated he had prior service in the U.S. Armed Forces and that he had been rejected for enlistment/reenlistment.

   b.  section VI (Remarks) that reference is made to item 24a with the entry "Recent Military Service - Army, Begin Date:  20060112 [sic], End Date:  20060221, E, C" and item 24b with the entry "Explanation - At the time of ETS Applicant was flagged for H/W [Height/Weight].  Soldier did not intend to reenlist during his initial enlistment."  It also shows an administrative waiver was approved for the applicant to enlist in the USAR.

6.  A DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document - Armed Forces of the United States) shows the applicant enlisted in the USAR for a period of 6 years on 29 December 2009.

7.  In support of his application, the applicant provides the following documents:

   a.  DA Form 5500-R, dated 4 August 2005, that shows the applicant's height was 73 inches, weight 195 pounds, and he was 25 years of age.  It also shows:

       (1)  his actual weight was 195 pounds, his authorized screening table weight was 200 pounds, and he was 5 pounds under the screening table weight;

       (2)  his actual body fat was 23.04%, his authorized body fat was 22.00%, and he was 1.04% over the body fat standard; and

       (3)  his first sergeant indicated with an "X" that the applicant "is not in compliance with the standards."

   b.  DA Form 638, dated 26 October 2005, that shows on the occasion of the applicant's ETS, he was recommended for award of the Army Commendation Medal (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster) (i.e., 3rd Award) for meritorious service from
9 April 2003 to 11 January 2006.

       (1)  Part IV (Recommendations/Approval/Disapproval), item 22 (I certify that this individual is eligible for an award in accordance with AR 600-8-22, and that the information contained in Part I is correct), shows that the applicant's eligibility for an award was certified.  Part IV also shows his chain of command recommended approval of the award and his brigade commander approved the award.

       (2)  Part V (Orders Data) does not show the approved award, an order number or date, or the signature of the orders issuing authority.

8.  AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military awards and decorations.  Chapter 1, paragraph 1-17 (Character of service), shows in:

   a.  subparagraph a(1) that commanders will ensure that individuals on whom favorable personnel actions have been suspended neither are recommended for nor receive awards during the period of the suspension.  Exceptions to the above are Soldiers who are flagged for Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) failure, in accordance with AR 600-8-2 (Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions), paragraph 1-15  (Processing exceptions).

   b.  Subparagraph b (Weight control) shows that flags for weight control block only attendance at full-time civil or military schooling, promotion, awards and decorations, assumption of command, and reenlistment or extension.  It also shows that as an exception to subparagraph a(1), a Soldier who is flagged for overweight may be recommended for and presented an award based on valor, heroism, or for length of service retirement [emphasis added].  A waiver of the overweight flag must be processed to the first general officer in the Soldier's chain of command for approval or disapproval.  A waiver for overweight is not required for award of the Purple Heart.  Approval or disapproval authority is delegated to the first general officer in the chain of command.  Waivers will be processed as separate and distinct actions from the award recommendation, and should be submitted and adjudicated prior to submission of the award recommendation.  Approved waivers will accompany the award recommendation once submitted. 

9.  AR 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) prescribes eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army, U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard.  Chapter 3 prescribes basic eligibility for prior-service applicants for enlistment and includes a list of Armed Forces RE codes.  RE-3 applies to individuals who are not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  This means that Soldiers assigned an RE-3 are ineligible for enlistment unless a waiver is granted.  This regulation further provides that RE codes may only be changed if they are determined to be administratively incorrect.

10.  AR 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  In pertinent part, it identifies the SPD codes to assign enlisted Soldiers administratively separated, as follows:

* SPD Code "JBK" for those involuntarily discharged under the provisions of
AR 635-200, chapter 4, based on completion of required active service

* SPD Code "LBK" for those involuntarily REFRAD and transferred (e.g., to the USAR) under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 4, based on completion of required active service


11.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows RE code "3" as the proper
RE code to assign to Soldiers with SPD code "LBK."  (It is noted the table also shows RE code "3" as the proper RE code to assign Soldiers with SPD code "JBK.")

12.  AR 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.

   a.  Chapter 2 contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.

   b.  Table 2-1 (DD Form 214 Preparation Instructions) contains item-by-item instructions for completing the DD Form 214.  It shows for:

       (1)  item 26 enter the proper SPD code representing the specific authority for separation, and

       (2)  item 27 that AR 601-210 determines RA and USAR reentry eligibility and provides regulatory guidance on the RE codes.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his request to change his RE code to "RE-1" should be reconsidered and that his SPD code of "LBK" should be changed to "JBK" because he met the AWCP standards prior to his ETS.

2.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.

   a.  The evidence the applicant provides shows that he did not meet the AWCP standards on 5 August 2005 because he exceeded the Army's body fat standard for his height/weight.  In addition, on 29 December 2009, on the occasion of applying for enlistment in the USAR, the applicant acknowledged with his signature that he was flagged at the time of his ETS (11 January 2006) for non-compliance with the Army's height/weight standards.

   b.  Notwithstanding the above, and despite the fact that award of the Army Commendation Medal was not announced in permanent orders, the applicant's award of the Army Commendation Medal (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster) for the period of service from 9 April 2003 to 11 January 2006 is not at issue, as the award is recorded in item 13 (i.e., Army Commendation Medal (3rd Award)) of his
DD Form 214.


3.  Records show the applicant entered active duty in the RA for a period of
6 years on 12 January 2000 and he was honorably released from active duty on 11 January 2006 based on completion of required active service.

4.  Records show that RE code "3" establishing the applicant's ineligibility for enlistment/reenlistment without an approved waiver was correctly entered on his DD Form 214 in accordance with governing regulations.  In addition, the appropriate SPD code of "LBK" was correctly entered on his DD Form 214 based on the reason for his separation (i.e., completion of required active service).  Thus, the entries for the RE and separation codes that are shown on the applicant's DD Form 214 are appropriate and correct

5.  The applicant was granted a waiver to enlist in the USAR on 29 December 2009.

6.  In view of all of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ___X____  __X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR AR20090008040, dated 20 October 2009.




      _______ _X______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100022241



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100022241



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001100

    Original file (20090001100.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 October 1975 for 3 years. While the applicant did not submit a copy of his DD Form 214 with his application, his records contain copies number 2 and 5 of his DD Form 214. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. deleting from item 27 of copy number 2 of the applicant's DD Form 214 the entry "Para 2-20, AR 601-280 applies"; b....

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001181

    Original file (20150001181.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The effective date of the flag is the date the Soldier was found to be in noncompliance with Army Regulation 600-9 (The AWCP). b. Paragraph 3-2b states that Soldiers not meeting body fat standards after 1 year from the date of entry into the active Army will be entered in the AWCP and flagged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-2 by the unit commander. The evidence of record shows on 3 September 2004, the commander disapproved the applicant's award of the AGCM for the period 9...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010980

    Original file (20090010980.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides the following additional documentary evidence in support of his request: a. an undated self-authored statement; b. copies of Orders R-01-680158, R-04-781930, and R-01-680158A1, issued by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (USAHRC), St. Louis, MO, on 10 January 2006, 3 April 2007, and 10 February 2009, respectively; c. a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 11 March 2009; d. copies of his DA Forms 2166-8...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010760

    Original file (20130010760.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He further states the recoupment of his educational assistance costs, as well as his separation, is unjustified for the following reasons: * the failed tape measurement standard was conducted on 21 September 2012 by a student and subject to error and a breach of his privacy * he passed a subsequent tape measurement standard on 31 October 2012 * his name was misspelled, his height was .5 inches shorter, and the calculations were wrong in the October 2012 tape measurement * he believes if one...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001059C070205

    Original file (20060001059C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 February 2005, the applicant was administered a "for record APFT" in which he passed the push-ups and sit-ups and failed the 2-mile run and was not within body fat standards. The applicant was administered a for record APFT in which he passed the push-ups and sit-ups but was not within body fat standards and he failed the 2-mile run. The advisory opinion restates that the applicant's contention that he was not allowed due process in appealing his bar to reenlistment carries...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017781

    Original file (20070017781.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 February 1987, by endorsement, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant that he was determined to have exceeded body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9 (Army Weight Control Program) and that a goal of 3 to 8 pounds of weight loss per month was considered to be satisfactory progress. On 1 August 1987, by memorandum, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant of his (the commander’s) intent to initiate separation action against him (the applicant) in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073692C070403

    Original file (2002073692C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army Reserve for six years on 5 February 1982 and completed his initial active duty for training. The applicant was discharged on his separation date on 7 October 1991. A separation code of “JBK” identifies an enlisted soldier discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 4, for completion of required active service, who is ineligible for, barred from, or otherwise denied reenlistment.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003582

    Original file (20090003582.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that the Reentry (RE) Code on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from an RE Code of RE-3 to an RE Code that will allow him to take an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) assignment. The applicant states since his Regular Army (RA) separation, he has been a member of the US Army Reserve (USAR). XXX _______ _ _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003999

    Original file (20110003999.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 July 1990, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 5 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of failure to meet the Army weight/body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9. Paragraph 5-15, in effect at the time, provided the policy for separating members who failed to meet the Army body composition/weight control standards if this condition was the only reason for separation and there...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017368

    Original file (20140017368.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of the narrative reason for his separation from honorably discharged due to failure to meet body fat standards to a medical discharge. On 4 April 1988, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 5-15 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for failing to meet body fat standards and enrollment in the AWCP and failing to make satisfactory...