PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           29 December 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026326

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

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty, be changed by removing her current separation authority (Block 25), separation code, or SPD code (Block 26), reentry code, or RE Code (Block 27), and narrative reason for separation (Block 28) and replacing them with more favorable entries.

3.  The applicant states that the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), recognizing her years of excellent service, upgraded her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to a general discharge (GD).  She adds that, for the same reason, Blocks 25-28 should also be upgraded.  In support of her application, she provides a copy of the ADRB’s Case Report and Directive, dated 19 May 1994.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that she enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 17 April 1984.  Following training as a fixed station radio repairer, she was assigned to Fort Huachuca, Arizona for duty.  On 7 September 1987, she was promoted to the rank of sergeant (E-5).

5.  In 1988, the applicant tested positive on a unit drug screening for use of cocaine. Court-martial charges were preferred against her and, on 18 August 1988, after consulting with legal counsel, she voluntarily, and in writing, submitted a request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200.  In so doing, the applicant admitted her guilt.  On 29 August 1988, her request was approved and she was ordered separated with a UOTHC discharge.

6.  The applicant was separated on 9 September 1988 with a UOTHC discharge. Her DD Form 214 reflected the following:  Block 25 (Separation Authority) – AR 635-200, Chapter 10; Block 26 (Separation Code) – KFS (For the Good of the Service - In Lieu of Court-Martial); Block 27 (Reentry Code) – 4, not eligible to reenlist; and Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Court-Martial.

7.  On 19 May 1994, the applicant appeared before the ADRB seeking a discharge upgrade.  The ADRB found the UOTHC discharge that the applicant received to be too harsh in light of her entire excellent service record.  The ADRB upgraded her discharge to a GD under honorable conditions, but felt that the applicant's reason for discharge was proper and voted not to change it.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

9.  Pertinent Army Regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned SPD codes and 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 Army.  Chapter 3 prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment, and includes a list of armed forces RE codes.  RE-4 applies to individuals who are ineligible to reenter the Army while RE-3 applies to individuals who are ineligible to reenlist, but such ineligibility is waivable.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 prescribes SPD codes.  The SPD code for a Chapter 10, AR 635-200 separation authority is KFS and carries an RE Code of RE-3.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with using cocaine, an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The Board noted that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offense.  The Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions, but that the ADRB upgraded the applicant’s discharge to general under honorable conditions after considering her entire record of service for the period under review.  The ADRB, being convinced that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, voted not to change it.  This Board concurs with the action of the ADRB.

2.  Pertinent Army regulations prescribe an RE code of RE-3 for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200.  The applicant was given an RE code of RE-4.

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected, but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by changing the DD Form 214 of the individual concerned to reflect that she was separated with an RE code of RE-3, eligible to reenlist with a waiver.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__GDP__  __CLG__  ___CJP__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_GEORGE D. PAXSON_
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026326	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991229	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19880909	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A74.00	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PLUS	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DASA	
ISSUES         1.	100.0000	
2.	100.0300	
3.	110.0200	
4.		
5.		
6.