MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:           

	BOARD DATE:            3 February 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12361
   AR1998012691

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Member	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his reentry (RE) code be changed to a more favorable RE code.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That it has been two years since his discharge, he acknowledges that he made a mistake and takes full responsibility for his past actions.  He asks the Board for a second chance.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted on 12 November 1992 for a period of 4 years and training as a personnel administration specialist.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 March 1994.

On 11 July 1994 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for two specifications of failure to go to appointed place of duty (FTG).  His punishment consisted of an oral reprimand and 7 days of extra duty.

On 7 December 1995 NJP was again imposed against the applicant for four specifications of FTG.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to PV2, a forfeiture of pay and 45 days of extra duty.  He appealed the punishment and the appeal authority granted his appeal.  His punishment was changed to a reduction to PFC and 30 days of extra duty.

On 6 January 1996 the applicant’s commander initiated a request to bar him from reenlistment.  He cited as the bases for his recommendation, the applicant’s NJP and the fact that he continuously failed to report to his appointed place of duty. 

The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf, and the appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment on 12 January 1996.

On 14 March 1996 the applicant was notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  The commander recommended separation with an Honorable Discharge and based his recommendation for separation on the applicant’s missed formation and 6 different failures to repair.  The applicant consulted with counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  Consequently, the commander submitted the recommendation to the appropriate authority.

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge, directed that the applicant be issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate and that he transferred into the Individual Ready Reserve to complete the remainder of his service obligation.

Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 25 March 1996 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance and issued a reentry code of RE-3.  He had served 3 years,
4 months, and 14 days of total active service.

Pertinent Army regulations provide 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.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment processing into the Regular Army and the USAR.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes.

RE-1 applies to persons completing their term of active service who are considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army.  

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have received nonjudicial punishment are so disqualified, as are persons with bars to reenlistment, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters
9, 10, 13, 14, and 16 of Army Regulation 635-200.   

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was properly discharged in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any of the applicant’s rights.

2.  The separation authority, separation code, RE code, and narrative reason for separation used in the applicant’s case are correct and were applied in accordance with the applicable regulations. 

3.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the RE code issued to him was in error or unjust.

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

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__sac___  ___mdm_  __fkm ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12361/AR1998012691	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/02/03	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  100.030		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.