MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           10 June 2003                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003084028

	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. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 both Item 26 (Separation Code) and Item 27 (Reentry Eligibility (RE) Code) on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to more favorable codes so that he will be eligible to reenter the military.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That his DD Form 214 does not indicate why his separation code is that of an RE-3.

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

That on 19 April 1989, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 93F (Field Artillery Meteorological Crewmember).  He completed the required training, was awarded MOS 93F and, on 24 October 1989, he was assigned to Fort Knox, Kentucky, with duties in MOS 93F.  On 26 October 1990, he was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas, with duties in MOS 93F.

On 4 November 1992, a flagging action was initiated against the applicant as a result of his being placed in the Army weight control program.  The applicant's DA Form 2A, Personnel Qualification Record, dated 9 March 1993, also shows that he was ineligible to reenlist due to being overweight.  There is no evidence that applicant was ever removed from the weight control program or that he requested a waiver to reenlist.  

On 18 March 1993, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200 upon expiration of his term of service (ETS).  He had completed 4 years of creditable active service.  He was assigned a Separation Code of "LBK" and a Reenlistment Code of "RE-3." 

On 7 July 1993, the Adjutant General's Department, Military Division, Topeka, Kansas, approved a waiver for the applicant to enlist in the Kansas Army National Guard (KSARNG).

On 12 July 1993, the applicant enlisted in the KSARNG for 3 years in his previous MOS and in pay grade E-4.  The applicant missed multiple unit training assemblies and on 21 March 1995, he was separated with a general discharge under honorable conditions as a result of being an unsatisfactory participant.  He was again assigned an RE-Code of "RE-3."

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 4 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, for the discharge or release from active duty upon termination of enlistment and other periods of active duty or active duty for training.  A soldier separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation will be awarded a character of service of honorable, unless the soldier is in entry-level status and service is uncharacterized.

A separation code of "LBK" applies to RA soldiers separated upon completion of their service obligation, but they are ineligible for reenlistment.

Pertinent Army Regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records and/or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlisting and processing into the RA and the eligibility of prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of Armed Forces RE codes and RA RE codes.  An RE-3 code applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable. Certain persons who have received nonjudicial punishment are so disqualified, as are persons with bars to reenlistment, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters 9, 10, 13, and 14 of Army Regulation 635-200.

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.  Upon completion of his active duty commitment on 18 March 1993, the applicant was assigned a Separation Code of "LBK" and an RE code of RE-3 because he had a bar to reenlistment and was ineligible for reenlistment due to being overweight.

3.  A Code of RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable as determined by enlistment officials and the needs of the Army.  The evidence available indicates the applicant was granted a waiver to enlist in the ARNG in July 1993.  There is no evidence available to indicate that he was ever denied a waiver to reenlist.

4.  In view of the circumstances in this case, both the assigned RE code and the separation code on the applicant's DD Form 214 were, and still are, appropriate.  The applicant has submitted no evidence that these codes are in error or should be changed.  

5.  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

__sac___  __slp___  __jtm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003084028	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030610	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19930418	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Chap 4  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A03.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.