PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           03 OCTOBER 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002073692

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		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 that his 7 October 1991 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show a reentry code of “1” in item 27 of that form, vice the “3” code shown.  He also requests award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.   

3.  The applicant states he was never in any trouble during his Army service.  A reentry code of “3” on his DD Form 214 is an administrative error.  He is thinking of enlisting in the Army and needs his reentry code changed.  Further, he was informed that he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal, but he never received it. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army Reserve for six years on 5 February 1982 and completed his initial active duty for training.  On 26 October 1983 he was reassigned from his Reserve unit in Warsaw, Virginia, to the Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training) at St. Louis, Missouri, for unsatisfactory participation in unit training assemblies.

5.  The applicant enlisted in the Army for four years on 8 October 1987, served in Korea for one year, completed airborne training, and in January 1989 was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina as a cook.  He served in Southwest Asia from September 1990 to March 1991.   

6.  On 15 February 1990 the applicant was “flagged” for not being in compliance with Army weight standards.  He was “flagged” on 2 October 1990 for failing the Army physical fitness test.

7.  A 1 March 1990 medical record indicates that the applicant was evaluated for his physical condition and was determined to exceed the Army’s weight standards by 45 pounds and the maximum allowable percent body fat standards by 8.92 percent.  A 6 March 1990 medical record shows that the applicant received nutrition counseling, with a recommended weight loss of 3-8 pounds per month.  

8.  A 13 September 1990 conversation record shows that an individual in the Enlistment Eligibility Activity Branch advised that soldiers who were flagged due to overweight would receive a reentry code of “3” on their DD Form 214. 

9.  A 19 September 1991 report of medical examination shows that the applicant was medically qualified for discharge with a physical profile of 1 1 1 1 1 1.  His height and weight on that report is shown as 68 inches and 226 pounds, respectively. 

10.  The applicant was discharged on his separation date on 7 October 1991.  He had 4 years of service during his current enlistment.  His discharge was honorable.  His DD Form 214 shows that he was awarded the Army Service Ribbon, the National Defense Service Medal, the Southwest Asia Service Medal with two bronze service stars, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Army Commendation Medal, and three awards of the Army Achievement Medal, among others.  It does not show award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  His DD Form 214 shows a separation code of “JBK” in item 26, and a reentry code of “3” in item 27. 

11.  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 prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.  A reentry code of “3” indicates that a person is ineligible for reenlistment unless a waiver is granted.  

12.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 prescribes the policy for standardization of separation program designator (SPD) codes.  SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations which identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty.  A separation code of  “JBK” identifies an enlisted soldier discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 4, for completion of required active service, who is ineligible for, barred from, or otherwise denied reenlistment.

13.  A March 1991 separation program designator code (SPD)/reentry (RE) code cross reference table shows that a SPD OF “JBK” with a corresponding RE code of “3.”

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the reason for the reentry code of “3” in item 27 of his DD Form 214 cannot positively be discerned, it is probable that he was ineligible for reenlistment because of an overweight condition; consequently, his DD Form 214 contained the appropriate reentry code of “3.”  It is presumed that the Army was correct in awarding that reentry code, and that it was not an administrative error as the applicant claims.  He has not provided any evidence to overcome that presumption.  There is insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request. 

2.  Nevertheless, the applicant served his country faithfully and honorably as evidenced by his record.  He is entitled to award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

3.  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 showing that the individual concerned was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 8 October 1987 through 7 October 1990.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__INW __  __WTM__  __CG___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Irene N. Wheelwright__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002073692	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20021003	
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.	107.00	
2.	110.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.