PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           20 June 2000      
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038644

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms .McKim-Spilker		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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 the narrative reason and the separation program designator code (SPD) for discharge be changed to convenience of the government.  

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he disclosed his life history to his recruiter and that the recruiter signed him up for the Army after speaking to his father, his foster parents, and social workers; that his father spoke with CID during the time he was in basic training; that he was promised he would receive an honorable discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, for the convenience of the government; and, that he was a good soldier. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 19 November 1980 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed basic combat training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and advanced individual training in military occupational specialty 96B (Intelligence Analyst) at Fort Huachuca, Arizona.

5.  On 11 July 1981 he completed basic parachutist school at Fort Benning, Georgia; and, was thereafter assigned to the 82d Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

6.  The applicant’s record documents that the highest permanent rank he held on active duty was private first class/E-3.  The record is void of nonjudicial punishment and courts-martial.

7.  On 11 May 1982 the applicant was notified that he was being processed for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 14, by reason of misconduct-fraudulent entry, for concealing a record as a juvenile offender and for concealment of medical defects.  

8.  On 10 June 1982 he was honorably discharged and credited with 1 year, 6 months, and 22 days active military service.

9.  The applicant’s DD 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that he was assigned the appropriate SPD Code “JKG” and Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code RE-3 based on applicable regulations.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14, established policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include fraudulent entry, convictions by civil authorities, pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
11.  AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), AR 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the proper reentry codes to assign to soldiers separating from the Army.

12.  AR 635-200 currently in effect places separation by reason of fraudulent entry in chapter 7, Defective Enlistments/Reenlistments and Extensions.  The narrative reason for separation is “Fraudulent Entry”, and in accordance with AR 635-5-1, the SPD code for individuals discharged under the provisions chapter 7 for fraudulent entry is “YDA.”

13.  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 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 code, including RA RE codes.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  

14.  Department of Defense Directive 1332.28 (discharge review procedures and standards) provides, in pertinent part, that a discharge shall be deemed equitable unless the policies and procedures under which the applicant was discharged differ materially from those currently in effect, provided that the current policies or procedures represent a substantial enhancement of rights and there is substantial doubt that the same result would have been obtained under the current standards.

15.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s discharge proceedings appear to have been conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time of his separation. 

2.  The applicant was assigned the appropriate SPD code based on the regulatory guidance for soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct-fraudulent entry.  Additionally, RE-3 was the properly assigned RE code.    

3.  Individuals currently discharged by reason of fraudulent entry are discharged under the provisions of chapter 7, AR 635-200 with a narrative reason for separation of “Fraudulent Entry” and are assigned an SPD code of YDA and an RE code of 3.

4.  Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and the applicant’s otherwise honorable service, the Board determined that the regulation currently in effect provides a substantial enhancement of rights by changing the narrative reason for separation from “Misconduct-fraudulent entry” to “Fraudulent Entry.”

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

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected to show that the individual concerned was honorably discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 7, section V, by reason of “Fraudulent Entry” with an SPD code of “YDA.”

2.  That the individual concerned be issued a new DD Form 214 reflecting the aforementioned changes.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

___vbc__  ___jea___  ___ewl__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038644	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000620	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19820610	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200 C14	
DISCHARGE REASON	144.6200.0000	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.9442.0000	
2.	144.6202.0000	
3.	144.0100.0000	
4.		
5.		
6.