MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           10 November 1998
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11153

	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.  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr.	Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Ms.	Irene E. Wheelwright		Member	
	Ms.	Margaret K. Patterson		Member	

	Also present, without vote, were:

	Mr.	Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr.	Michael L. Engle		Analyst	

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

	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-3 to RE-1.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the record is unjust because he did not deserve to be isolated from the Army.  He was a good and honest soldier.  He was 18 years of age and made a lot of mistakes and is now sorry and wants one more chance to make his life right.

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

He enlisted in the Army on 25 August 1993 for 3 years.  He successfully completed his initial training and was assigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, as an infantryman (11B).

On 31 August 1994 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for two counts of AWOL (112 days).  The punishment included a reduction to private (E-1), a forfeiture of $416.00 per month for two months (suspended) and 45 days extra duty.

On 5 January 1995 the applicant’s commander initiated a recommendation to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b for a pattern of misconduct, including frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.

On 25 January 1995 the separation action was approved by the appropriate authority, who directed that the applicant receive a General Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, on 27 January 1995 the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.  He completed 1 year, 1 month and 10 days of creditable active service and had 112 days lost time.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows an RE code 3.

Army Regulation 601-210 prescribes eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the 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 who do not meet basic reentry criteria at time of separation.  The disqualification is waivable.  Individuals separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14  for misconduct are not eligible for enlistment without an approved waiver.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 14-12b provides for separating members for a pattern of misconduct, including frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

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’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  The RE 3 code reflects that he must have an approved waiver to reenter the Army; and therefore, it is correctly assigned in accordance with applicable regulations.

3.  The applicant’s contention that his discharge was unjust and that he deserves a second chance is not supported by the evidence of record, nor has he provided any substantiating evidence to support his allegation.

4.  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.

5.  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

___CMF__  __IEW___  __MKP___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director