MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           20 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001059923

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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:  In effect, that his reentry (RE) code be changed from RE-3 to RE-1. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the RE-3 code that is listed on his separation document (DD Form 214) is incorrect and should be corrected to show that he received an RE-1 code.  He states that his military career is free of non-judicial punishment (NJP) and that the RE-3 code listed on his DD Form 214 is incorrect and was based solely on a Declination of Continued Service Statement (DCSS) he signed.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 and the DCSS (DA Form 4991-R) he signed.

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

On 1 November 1990, he initially enlisted in the Army and honorably served for 
2 years, 10 months, 28 days and he reenlisted for the period of service under review on 24 January 1996.  His record shows that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was sergeant/E-5 (SGT/E-5) and that during his active duty tenure he received the following awards:  Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; Army Commendation Medal; Army Achievement Medal 
(2nd OLC); Good Conduct Medal; Armed Forces Service Medal; and National Defense Service Medal.  

The DA Form 4991-R confirms that on 29 June 1999, he was counseled by a career counselor in regard to his incurring a service remaining requirement of 
13 months under the provisions of chapter 3, Army Regulation 601-280 as a result of his receipt of assignment instructions.  

The DCSS also shows that the applicant was advised by the career counselor that his refusal to take the necessary action to meet the service remaining obligation would result in his being placed in a non-promotable status, would prohibit him from enlisting without an approved waiver from DA, from extending his enlistment, and from applying for a commissioned officer or warrant officer program. 

The career counselor also advised the applicant of the various options available to him to satisfy the service remaining requirement and of the effects of his refusal to take action to meet the length of service requirement.  After this counseling, the applicant again refused to comply with the operational commitment and signed the DCSS.  He acknowledged that he had been counseled in regard to the action required by him to satisfy a length of service requirement incident to an operational commitment and on the effects of his refusal to extend his enlistment or reenlist to comply with the commitment.  

The applicant further indicated in the signed DCSS that he understood the effects his refusal would have on his Army career and on any future decision he might make concerning reenlistment or enlistment after separation.  His unit commander also signed the DCSS and indicated that he had reviewed and discussed the applicant’s decisions with him and determined that the applicant had been properly counseled and still refused to take action to acquire sufficient service to comply with the operational commitment. 

On 23 May 2000, the applicant was honorably discharged after completing a total of 4 years and 4 months of active military service.  The DD Form 214 issued to him on the date of his separation confirms that he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KBK and a RE-3 code. 

Army Regulation 635-5-1 (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.  The SPD code of KBK was the appropriate code to assign members separating under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, for completion of required active service.  In addition, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), establishes RE-3 as the proper reentry code to assign soldiers who had signed a DCSS at the time of their separation from the Army. 

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 includes a list of armed forces 
RE codes, including RA RE codes.  RE-1 applies to persons completing their terms of service who are considered fully qualified to reenter the Army and 
RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service but the disqualification is waivable.

Army Regulation 601-280 prescribes the eligibility criteria and options currently available in the Army Retention Program.  Paragraph 3-3 states, in effect, that those individuals who refuse to take action to meet service requirements will be counseled on the effects of their refusal and a statement to the effect that the individual has been counseled and refuses to comply with published instructions will be prepared.  It also stipulates, in pertinent part, that the statement will include a statement that the soldier will be classified as ineligible to reenlist for a period of 93 days after discharge and will be placed in a nonpromotable status.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

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 evidence of record confirms that the applicant voluntarily requested separation after signing a DCSS and was assigned an RE-3 code in accordance with applicable regulations.  It also shows that he had been properly counseled on the effects of his signing the DCSS, which included his being assigned an 
RE-3 code.

2.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the Board finds the RE-3 code was and still is appropriate.  It properly reflects the fact that the applicant requires a waiver in order to enlist based on the disqualification that resulted from his signing a DCSS.  Thus, the Board concludes a change to his RE-3 code is not warranted.  However, this does not mean that he is completely denied the opportunity to reenlist.  Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for determining if an applicant meets the current enlistment criteria and are required to process requests for waivers.  Therefore, if he is interested in reentering the Army, it is suggested that he visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.

3.  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.

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

__JLP__  __MHM__  __RKS___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001059923	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/11/20	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.