MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           9 April 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002068930

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, 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 be changed to allow him to reenlist in the Air Force.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was separated for failing his Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT).  This was his choice.  He was very immature and tried to get out.  He is now in the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) and doing quite well.  However, his wife is in the Air Force and he would like to enlist in the Air Force but his RE code, while it would allow him to enlist in the Regular Army, will not allow him to join the Air Force.  He provides no supporting evidence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 January 1994.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 74C (Record Telecommunications Center Operator).

On 23 May 1995, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  The examining physician found him to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in proceedings and to be mentally responsible.

The applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.  

On 16 June 1995, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance for failing to pass two record APFTs.  

On 16 June 1995, the applicant was advised by consulting counsel of the basis of the contemplated separation action.  He waived his rights and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 16 June 1995, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the soldier be issued an honorable discharge.

On 6 July 1995, the applicant was released from active duty, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance, with an honorable discharge.  He had completed 1 year and 6 months of creditable active service and had no lost time.  He was given a separation code (SPD) of LHJ (involuntary release from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance) and an RE code of 3.

On 26 July 2000, the applicant was released from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) and assigned to a troop program unit.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member may be separated when it is determined that he or she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance.  Commanders will separate a soldier for unsatisfactory performance when it is clearly established that, in the commander’s judgment, the soldier will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

Army Regulation 635-5-1, SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table states that when the SPD is LHJ then RE code 3 will be given.

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 USAR.  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.

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  

Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.  They are required to process a request for waiver under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program. 

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.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The applicant was given the proper RE code considering the reason for and authority under which he was separated.  The applicant was disqualified from reenlistment, but the disqualification is waivable for enlistment in the Army.

3.  The Board understands the applicant desires to enlist in the Air Force.  Since Army enlistment criteria does change, an applicant is normally advised to periodically visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.  The Board presumes that Air Force enlistment criteria periodically changes, also, and so the applicant is advised to periodically visit his local Air Force recruiting station to check on the Air Force’s current enlistment criteria.

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

__rvo___  __rjw___  __dph___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068930	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020409	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.