MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:             21 December 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2000043410

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	

	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 of RE-3 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES: He was not separated from the Army because of misconduct.  He was reduced by a special court-martial from the rank of E-4 to E-3.  After some time had passed he was informed that he had to separate from active duty for “Qualitative Reasons”.  He is requesting his RE code of RE-3C be changed to allow him to rejoin the Navy.

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

He entered the Regular Navy on 28 January 1986.  He completed training in aviation fundamentals, achieved the pay grade of E-4, and served until his honorable discharge on 22 May 1987 under the provisions of Military Personnel Manual 3620200/Naval Operations 013/87, for Parenthood, with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of LDG, and a RE code of RE-3B.

He entered the Regular Army on 27 February 1991, was trained as a 68L, avionics communications equipment repairer, achieved the rank of private first class, and served continuously until his discharge on 14 September 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, for Qualitative Retention Program with a SPD code of JCC and a RE code of RE-3C.  The DD Form 214 (Discharge Document) reflects the applicant had 6 years, 9 months and 32 days of total active service.

Army Regulation 635-200, provides in pertinent part, that chapter 16 applies to personnel denied reenlistment and provides that soldiers who receive DA imposed or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they will be unable to overcome the bar may apply for immediate discharge. Incident to the request the member must state that he understands that recoupment of unearned portions of any enlistment or reenlistment bonus is required and that later reenlistment is not permitted.

Army Regulation 601-210, provides in pertinent part, that RE-3C applies to persons who have completed over 4 months of service who do not meet the basic eligibility pay grade requirements of AR 601-280, chapter 2.  Those persons 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.  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.  

2.  The preparation of the applicant’s DD Form 214 was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

3.  The applicant is correct in his assertion that he was not discharged due to misconduct.  His DD Form 214 correctly indicates he was discharged under the qualitative retention program.  The Board empathizes with the applicant’s desire to join the Navy, but points out that the RE code RE-3C is waivable.  The applicant when separated from the Navy was given a RE code of RE-3B.  He was later able to enlist in the Army with waiver.  Likewise, the Navy determines its own enlistment policies and may grant a waiver if they so wish.  The Board has no choice, but to deny the applicant’s request.

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

____kka__  ____gjw  _  ___ewl _  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043410	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001221	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.