MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            4 March 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999018679

	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.	Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

	The following members, a quorum, were present.

	Mr.	Curtis W. Barbee		Chairperson	
	Ms.	Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Mr.	Raymond J. Wagner		Member	

	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:  In effect, that his Reentry (RE) Code 3 and 3C be changed to a more favorable code in order to reenter the Active Army.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he did not receive a 6-month review of his bar to reenlistment by his unit commander.  He also states that he went to report his case to the Inspector General (IG), however, the office was closed when he arrived.  He further states that at the time of his discharge he was promoted to SPC/E-4 in order to reenlist, however, the promotion was revoked due to his bar to reenlistment.  

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

The applicant entered active duty on 23 February 1984 and served as a light wheel vehicle mechanic.

In October 1984 the applicant began receiving numerous counseling statements and nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect, assault, failure to report, failure to maintain standards and for disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer.

The applicant was barred from reenlistment on 15 October 1986 for the aforementioned counseling and NJP for his misconduct.

The applicant received NJP on 3 August 1987 for making a false official statement to a commissioned officer on 8 June 1987. His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended), a forfeiture of pay, and 14 days restriction and extra duty.

The applicant was discharged on 22 February 1988 under the provisions of
AR 635-200, chapter 4, based on his completion of his required active service.  He had completed 4 years of creditable service and was issued an RE code of RE “3” and RE “3C”. 

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 US 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 nor qualified for continued Army service, but the 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 chapter 9, 10, 13, 14, and 16 of Army Regulation 635-200.

RE-3C applies to soldiers who have completed over 4 months of service who do not meet the basic eligibility pay grade requirements of AR 601-280, chapter 2, 
or who have been denied reenlistment under the Qualitative Retention Process under AR 600-200, chapter 4, and who are ineligible for enlistment unless a waiver is granted.

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 separated and assigned a reentry code in accordance with regulations then in effect.

2.  The applicant has failed to show, through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that the RE code issued to him was incorrect.

3.  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.

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

CWB____  EB______  RJW____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director