APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That applicant does not clearly state what he is requesting but presumably he is requesting a change in his reentry eligibility code.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he wants to join the Reserves.

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

He was born on 12 January 1975.  He completed 12 years of formal education.  On 11 January 1995, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupation specialty 11M (Fighting Vehicle Infantryman).

The applicant was counseled on at least 13 different occasions for infractions including disobeying a lawful order, failing to prepare for inspection, failing to pay just debts, failing to be at appointed place of duty, substandard appearance and performance and similar infractions.

On 7 February 1996, the applicant received a local bar to reenlistment.

On 8 February 1996, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for three specifications of failing to go to his appointed place of duty and one specification of making a false statement.

On 13 February 1996, the applicant completed a mental status evaluation and was found to be mentally capable of understanding and participating in board proceedings and was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the commander.

On 20 February 1996, the commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for pattern of misconduct. 

On 20 February 1996, the applicant acknowledged the separation action.  He requested consultation with counsel  and elected to submit statements in his own behalf.

His counsel submitted a statement that the counseling requirements of the regulation had not been met.  

On 21 March 1996, the installation Senior Trial Counsel determined that the separation packet was legally sufficient.
On 26 March 1996, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed the applicant receive a general discharge.

On 23 April 1996, the applicant was discharged in the pay grade of E-2 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct.  He had completed 1 year, 13 months and 13 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.  His reentry eligibility code was RE-3.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

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 and processing into the Regular Army  (RA) and the U.S. Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waiverable.  

Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.  They are required to process a request for waiver under the provisions of Chapter 4, Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program.  Since enlistment criteria does change, and since an individual has the right to apply for a waiver, the applicant should periodically visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.

On 7 May 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgraded discharge.

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.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations. 

3.   The assigned reentry eligibility code of RE-3 was and still is appropriate.  The applicant was disqualified from reenlistment, but the disqualification is waiverable.

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

                       DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director