MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-09378
                                          AR1998009882

	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	
	Mr. W. E. Schnupp		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		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:  That his reentry (RE) code be changed from RE-4 to RE-3.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the code was changed when he left Germany for another duty station.  His early discharge was due to family problems.  It was agreed the RE code would allow him reentry.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 2 December 1987.  He served     2 years as a cannoneer and was honorably discharged on 6 July 1990 due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  His awards include the Army Service Ribbon, the Sharpshooter Badge with M-16 rifle bar and the Expert Badge with hand grenade bar.

During his period of service he received nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ on three separate occasions for fighting, sleeping at his post, leaving his post before being relieved, disobeying a lawful order and being disrespectful.  Additionally, the record indicates that he was counseled for failure to repair, missing formation and indebtedness.

As a result of the foregoing, on 7 June 1989 his commander imposed a bar to his reenlistment.  In response to the bar, the applicant indicated that he did not desire to submit a statement in his own behalf nor did he desire to appeal the bar.

In accordance with Army regulations, the bar to reenlistment was review by his commander 6 months after its imposition.  The commander decided that the bar should remain in effect.  Thereafter, the applicant chose to request early separation because of the bar, and on 6 June 1990 he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200.

Army Regulation 635-200, Enlisted Personnel Separations, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by changes in service obligations. Paragraph 16-5 applies to personnel denied reenlistment and provides that soldiers who receive DA or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they will be unable to overcome the bar may apply for immediate discharge. Incident to the request, the member must state that he understands that recoupment of unearned portions of any enlistment or reenlistment bonus is required and that later reenlistment is not permitted.

Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program, determines reentry eligibility and regulates the assignment of the RE code.  RE-4 applies to persons separated from their last period of service with a non-waivable disqualification.

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 record contains no evidence to indicate that the applicant’s separation was the result of family problems as he contends.  Rather, it appears that the bar to his reenlistment was the result of persistent misconduct on his part.

2.  The applicant was discharged because of a bar to his reenlistment, which is a non-waivable disqualification.  He was also properly assigned a RE-4 code to show that he was ineligible for reenlistment.  

3.  RE codes are assigned based on the authority for separation and are not negotiable, therefore, the Board does not accept his statement that it was agreed that the RE code would allow him to reenter.

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

__INW___  __VBC__  _CJS___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-09378/AR1998009882	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990211	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19900706	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Chap 16-5	
DISCHARGE REASON	Bar to reenlistment	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	102.4	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.