MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            26 July 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2001053951

	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:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		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 be changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he is requesting his RE code be upgraded not because it is in error, but because it no longer accurately reflects his character.  He relates that his wife was only sixteen years old when he enlisted; that they were both very immature and he was determined to do things his way.  At the time of his discharge he thought it best if he were out of the service and that maybe things would improve for them.  They did not and he and his wife divorced.   He has two wonderful children, has remarried, matured and understands his past faults.  He is trying to rectify all of his past mistakes and wishes to give his family a prosperous future.  He implores the Board to grant his request to change his RE code so that he may enlist and have the pride he once had.

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

He entered active duty on 6 July 1989 and was trained as a unit level communications maintainer.  He served in Southwest Asia from 17 September 1990 to 18 April 1991.  He was separated with an honorable discharge on 1 May 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, chapter 13, Unsatisfactory Performance, with a Separation Program Designator of JHJ and an RE-3 code.

His records reflect that his date of birth is 28 April 1970.  His wife’s date of birth is 24 February 1975.  On the date he entered active duty he was 19 and she was 14 years of age.

On 15 July 1991, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for issuing checks that were returned for insufficient funds.  His punishment consisted of 10 days extra duty.

On 21 November 1991, NJP was imposed against him for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of 14 days restriction.

On 26 March 1992, NJP was again imposed against him for failure to obey an order give by a noncommissioned officer.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3, forfeiture of pay, 14 days extra duty and restriction.

On 3 December 1991, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13.

On 28 January 1992, the applicant underwent a separation medical examination and was found qualified for separation.

On 23 March 1992, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived consideration, personal appearance, and representation before a board of officers and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 26 March 1992, the commander submitted his recommendation to separate the applicant for unsatisfactory performance.

On 26 March 1992, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge certificate and not transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve. 

The applicant was discharged on 1 May 1992 with a total of 2 years, 9 months and 26 days of creditable service.

AR 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness and unsuitability.  At that time, paragraph
13-4c provided for the separation of individuals for unsuitability whose record evidenced apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, and an inability to expend effort constructively.  When separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual’s entire record.

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.  AR 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army 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.

RE 3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have received nonjudical 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 AR 635-200.

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 Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s record of service, considered the ages of he and his spouse as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The Board concluded that the separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  The applicant was separated and assigned a RE code in accordance with regulations then in effect. Therefore, the applicant’s separation authority is correct as currently constituted.

2.  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 this requirement.

3.  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

__rvo___  ___hof___  ____ena_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001053951	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010726	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
.  1021		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.