DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0 TRG
Docket No:
5 November 2001
8201-01
From:
To:
Subj:
Ref:
Encl:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
(1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Case Summary
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
1.
former enlisted member of the Navy filed enclosure (1) with this
Board requesting that his record be corrected to show an RE-3
reenlistment code vice the RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
The Board, consisting of Mr. Pfeiffer, Mr. Zsalman and Ms.
2.
Hare, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on
30 October 2001 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.
3.
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as
follows:
The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
Documentary material considered by
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.
Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 16 July 2001 at age
C .
On 31 July 2001 he was notified of separation processing due
In connection with this processing, he elected to waive
19.
to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by a broke bone in his left
foot.
his procedural rights.
directed an entry level separation and he was so separated that
"Failed
same day.
Medical/Physical Procurement Standards", and the Separation
Program Designator (SPD) code is
The narrative reason for separation is
On 1 August 2001 the separation authority
"JFW".
d.
Petitioner states that he informed his recruiter of the
his foot, which had been repaired with a pin, and
broken bone in
he subsequently passed his enlistment physical.
However, the
doctor at recruit training recommended his separation because a
waiver of his physical condition was required prior to
enlistment.
a waiver with the RE-4 reenlistment code.
He desires to reenlist but can not be processed for
e.
Reference (b) states that individuals separated with an
An RE-3Q is only assigned to officer
SPD of JFW must either be assigned an RE-3Q or an RE-4
reenlistment code.
candidates and the RE-4 reenlistment code is the only code that
fits Petitioner's circumstances.
The Board is aware that the
only other reason for separation that arguable fits the
This
circumstances of his case is
reason is assigned if an individual would not have been enlisted
if the disqualifying factor had been known.
rrJFCW is assigned with that narrative reason for separation and
the assignment of the full range of reenlistment code is
authorized, including an RE-3E code.
"Erroneous Entry (other)".
The SPD code of
.
CONCLUSION:
Additionally, Petitioner's
The Board believes that reference
Had the narrative reason for separation been
The Board notes that Petitioner's only problem in
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action.
recruit training was the foot injury.
failure to meet the physical procurement standards means that he
should not have been enlisted.
Accordingly, his enlistment was
erroneous.
erroneous enlistment, he could have received an RE-3E
reenlistment code.
provide for an RE-3 reenlistment code in cases such as this.
Given the circumstances,
the Board believes that since the
physical condition may be considered for a waiver, an RE-4
reenlistment code is inappropriate.
Therefore, the Board
concludes the reenlistment code which most closely fits the
circumstances is an RE-3E reenlistment code, and such a code
should now be assigned as an exception to policy.
The RE-3E
code will alert recruiters that there is a problem that must be
resolved before enlistment can be authorized, but will not
preclude consideration for an enlistment waiver.
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 assignment of the
RE-3E reenlistment code.
(b) should
RECOMMENDATION:
a.
Form 215 to show that on 1
reenlistment code vice the
That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by issuing a DD
August 2001 he was assigned an-RE-3E
RE-4 reenlistment code now of record.
2
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.
and that the foregoing is a true and
review and deliberations,
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
/
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Acting Recorder
N
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.
Executive Director
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07015-01
states that because he is free of diplopia, Petitioner should be The doctor considered cured. 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. Therefore, the Board concludes that the Given the This code will alert RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that a. on 8 October 1999 he was assigned an RE-3E...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08112-00
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 8112-00 19 July 2001 Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF (a) Title 10 U.S.C. An RE-3E reenlistment code is authorized when an individual is separated because he or she was enlisted in error. and may no longer have his Since the regulation does This code will The Board further concludes that this Report of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04752-07
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 her RE-4 reenlistment code and reason for discharge (“Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards”)- 2. She was discharged with an entry level separation, assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, and a JFW separation code on 9 March 2006.f. That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.c.
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2007-005
following codes, narrative reasons, and reenlistment codes: SPD Code The Separation Program Designator Handbook in effect in 2001 authorized the use of the Narrative Reason RE Code Authority RE-3L 12-B-20 Entry Level Performance and Conduct JGA (as on applicant’s DD 214) JFW Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards Condition, Not a Disability RE-3G RE-3X RE-4 RE-3G RE-3X RE-4 12-B-12 12-B-12 Disability, Existed Prior to Service, Medical Board Erroneous Entry...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07425-00
1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected by changing the 4 reenlistment code assigned on 25 September 2000. was within days of completing recruit training when he was separated. "JFC", The record should then be corrected to show that "Erroneous entry (other)" and The RE-3E reenlistment code The Board further...
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 | CY2002 | 08395-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WAsHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No: 6 February 2002 8395-01 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy FORME REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. committed any acts of misconduct during his enlistment, or performed his duties in an unsatisfactory manner, it would be in the interest of justice to assign him a reenlistment code RE-3E, which would permit him to apply for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003447
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 August 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120003447 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 further states that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. He was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, and was properly issued a separation code of JFW and an RE Code of "3" in accordance with the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00105-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected that he was assigned a reentry code of “RE-3 or lower”, and that he did not fail procurement medical or physical standards. b. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 26 June 2006. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 27 July 2006, he was discharged by reason of erroneous...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05010-10
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. 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. Although Petitioner was properly...