MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           07 FEBRUARY 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061840

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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 Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be changed from RE-3C to RE-1.

APPLICANT STATES:  He believes he received an RE Code of “3C” unfairly and was not present when his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) was completed and as such was not provided an opportunity to “contest” the code.  He states that he wanted to reenlist at the time of his 1989 separation from active duty but was told he had to “get out and then reenlist.”  He submits no evidence in support of his request.

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

He entered active duty on 21 February 1986 for a period of 3 years after several months in the Delayed Entry/Enlistment Program.  He was trained as a Fuel and Electrical Systems Repairer and on 20 February 1989, at the completion of his enlistment contract, was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service in pay grade E-2.  His separation document indicates his effective date for pay grade E-2 was 28 November 1988.

Records available to the Board do not contain any other documents associated with his period of active duty, except his initial enlistment contract, a copy of his separation orders, and orders associated with award of his military specialty.  There were no promotion, disciplinary, or performance documents in records available to the Board.

Item 27 (reenlistment code) on his 1989 DD Form 214 reflects an RE Code of “3C.”  The applicant was not available to sign his DD Form 214 and there is no explanation in available records for his absence.

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 prescribed basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE Codes, including RA RE Codes.  

RE-3C, a code in effect at the time of the applicant’s separation, applied to individuals who had completed over 4 months of service who did not meet the basic eligibility pay grade requirements for reenlistment as outlined in Army Regulation 601-280.  Army Regulation 601-280 stated that Individuals in pay grade E-2, regardless of the years of service completed, were not authorized reenlistment.
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.  Notwithstanding the applicant’s contention that his 1989 RE Code is in error, there is no evidence available to the Board that confirms the code is wrong.  The fact that the applicant was not available to authenticate his separation document is not evidence that the code was wrong or that he would have been successful in having it changed to RE-1 if he had been given the opportunity to “contest” the code at the time of his separation.  The Board notes that the RE Code is consistent with the code which would have been assigned to soldiers in pay grade (E-2) who were separated after more than 4 months of service. 

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 that 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

__FNE __  __MKP __  __LE   __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061840	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020207	
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.	110.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.