PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  23 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000049143

	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. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy		Member	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		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 correction to her separation document (DD Form 214) to items number 11, (Primary Specialty), number 14 (Military Education), number 15b (High School (HS) Graduate or Equivalent) and number 27 (Reentry Code).

3.  The applicant states that her DD Form 214 does not show she was assigned a military occupational specialty (MOS), a HS graduate or equivalent, and her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code should be changed from RE code 3.  Her diabetic grandmother was sick and she needed a hardship discharge.  She also states she should be allowed to reenter the Army before 2 years.  She submits a detailed letter, a copy of her DD Form 214, Basic Combat Training Diploma dated 28 October 1999, a Food Service Specialist Course (MOS 92G10) Diploma dated 13 January 2000, and a General Educational Development (GED) Diploma dated 21 September 1995 in support of her request.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that she enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years as private first class, E-3 on 10 August 1999 for pay grade E-3 and food service specialist training.  She entered the service with a HS GED equivalency.  She completed Basic Combat Training on 28 October 1999.

5.  She completed the Food Service Specialist Course on 13 January 2000.

6.  She was counseled on several occasions concerning her disruptive behavior. She was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on two occasions for failure to follow a direct order and failure to go to her appointed place of duty.

7.  On 3 February 2000, her commander recommended separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, based on the applicant’s disrespectful behavior and unwillingness to adapt to the military environment, and after several attempts at rehabilitation to put forth effort to soldierize herself and adapt to military life.

8.  On 16 February 2000, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant acknowledged notification of the proposed separation from the United States Army. She elected not to submit a statement on her own behalf and acknowledged she understood she would be ineligible to apply for enlisted in the Army for a period of 2 years after discharge.

9.  On 23 February 2000, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s separation.

10.  She did not serve in MOS 92G.

11.  She was separated on 25 February 2000 in pay grade E-3 for Entry Level Status Performance and Conduct.  Her character of service was “Uncharacterized.”  She had a total of 6 months and 16 days net active service.  She was assigned RE code 3.

12.  Her DD Form 214 shows none in item number 11, Primary Specialty.  Item number 15b shows “No” for HS graduate or equivalent.  Item number 14, Military Education, shows none.

13.  Her records do not show she applied for a hardship discharge due to her circumstances at home.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 11, of that regulation, in effect at the time, provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both).  This policy applied to individuals who had demonstrated that they were not qualified for retention because they could not adapt socially or emotionally to military life, or because they lacked the aptitude, ability, motivation or self discipline for military service, or that they had demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  The regulation specifies that Item number 11, Primary Specialty will list all MOS’s served in for at least one year and include for each MOS the number of years and months served.  Item number 14, Military Education will list training courses successfully completed during the period of service.  Item number 15b HS Graduate or Equivalent, shows when a soldier has a GED.

16.  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.

17.  RE-3 applies to persons not 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 chapters 9, 10, 11, 13, and 14 of Army Regulation 635-200.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant is entitled to correction of her separation document, in item number 14 to show completion of the Food Service Specialist Course and in item number 15b to show she is a high school graduate or equivalent.

2.  She is not entitled to show an MOS in item number 11 that was not awarded to her and in which she did not serve in during her service.

3.  The applicant is also not entitled to a change or removal of her assigned RE-3 code, or to removal of the disqualification that caused assignment of the code.  She has not shown error or injustice.

4.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification may be waivable for further enlistment.  The Board notes here that she may be eligible to apply for a waiver for enlistment, and that she may visit her nearest military recruiting office for further information.

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 by showing the Food Service Specialist Course in item number 14 and completion of the GED in item number 15b on the separation document of the individual concerned.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__ls____  ___to____  __wm__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Luther L. Santiful__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000049143	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010123	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.	100.07	
3.	110.00	
4.		
5.		
6.