PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           16 January 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002072438

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Ms. Marla J. N. Troup		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, in effect, that his separation program designator (SPD) code be corrected.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served in good faith from 15 April 1980 through 24 January 1989 during peace time, and also did his duty as a soldier during the Gulf War.  He claims that in light of his good service, it was unjust to give him a bad SPD code because he made the decision to get out of the Army at the expiration of his term of service (ETS).  In support of his application, he submits two separation documents (DD Forms 214), dated 24 January 1989 and 16 June 1991.  However, the applicant did not specify which of the codes he believes was unjust and wishes corrected.  As a result, the Board addressed the validity of the SPD codes contained on both separation documents.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 24 January 1989, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) after completing 8 years, 9 months, and 10 days of active military service during that particular period of service.  The DD Form 214 issued to him for this period of active duty service confirms that the authority for his separation was chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, and the reason for his separation was ETS.  This document also verifies that based on the authority and reason for his separation, he was assigned a SPD code of JBK and a reentry code of RE-3A.  

5.  On 27 March 1990, while a member of the United States Army Reserve (USAR), the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Desert/Desert Shield.  He continuously served for 8 months and 20 days until he was honorably REFRAD on 16 June 1991.  The DD Form 214 issued to him upon his completion of this period of service confirms that the authority for his separation was chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, and the narrative reason for his separation was ETS.  This document also confirms that he was assigned a SPD of LBK.  

6.  In connection with the processing of this case, a review of the applicant’s record was conducted by an official of the Department of the Army (DA), Chief, Enlisted Career Systems Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1.  This review revealed no evidence to show that the applicant being assigned the SPD code of LBK upon his separation on 16 June 1991 was warranted, and based on the record it appeared the appropriate SPD code assignment would have been MBK.  This records review revealed no evidence in regard to the applicant’s SPD code assignment upon his separation in 1989.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the SPD to be used for these stated reasons.  This regulation lists the following four SPD codes that can be assigned to members who are separated at ETS under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, based on the conditions indicated:  KBK, for members voluntarily discharged who are fully eligible to reenlist; MBK, for member voluntarily REFRAD and transferred to the USAR who are fully eligible to reenlist; JBK, for members involuntarily discharged who are ineligible for, barred from, or otherwise denied reenlistment; LBK, for members involuntarily REFRAD and transferred to the USAR who are ineligible for, barred from, or otherwise denied reenlistment.  

8.  Table 2-3, Army Regulation 635-5, in effect at the time, contained the SPD/RE code cross reference table.  This table identified the authorized RE code based on the SPD code assignment.  It confirmed that the following SPD codes assigned at ETS were authorized RE codes indicated:  KBK, RE-1; MBK, RE-1; JBK, RE-3; and LBK, RE-3.  RE-3A applied to members separated at ETS who had signed a Declination of Continued Service Statement (DCSS).

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the SPD code he was assigned was inappropriate based on his faithful service.  Although, the applicant did not specify which period of service he was referring to, the Board elected to evaluate the SPD and RE code assignments for both of the applicant’s periods of active duty service.  

2.  By regulation, members separated at ETS are assigned an SPD based on their reenlistment eligibility at the time of separation.  The evidence of record indicates that at the completion of his first period of service on 24 January 1989, the applicant was assigned a SPD code of JBK and a corresponding RE code of RE-3A.  The specific facts and circumstances pertaining to the assignment of these codes are not on file; however, the Board notes there is a properly constituted DD Form 214 on file that was authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation.  Therefore, the Board presumes government regularity in the applicant’s separation processing, which includes the assignment of the SPD and RE codes in question.  

3.  Lacking independent evidence to the contrary, the Board concludes that SPD and RE codes listed in the applicant’s 24 January 1989 were assigned in accordance with applicable regulations in effect at the time.  Thus, the Board finds no error or injustice related to these code assignments, and it concludes that the SPD and RE codes assigned were appropriate. 
4.  However, based on a review of the applicant’s record for his period of active duty service that ended on 16 June 1991, the Board finds no indication that the applicant was barred from, ineligible, or otherwise denied reenlistment at the time of his separation.  Therefore, the Board finds no basis for the assignment of the SPD code of LBK, and it concludes that the applicant should have been appropriately assigned an SPD code of MBK at the time of his REFRAD and transfer back to the USAR.

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 amending the entry in Item 16 (Separation Code) of the 16 June 1991 DD Form 214 of the individual concerned to read MBK vice the current entry of LBK; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects this change.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__RVO__  __AAO  _  __MJNT__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.  _
		          CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002072438	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/01/16	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.