MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           29 July 2003                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003086319

	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	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison 		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy		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 the reason for his discharge for entry level status (ELS) Performance and Conduct be changed to a more favorable reason.  In addition, he requests that his reentry (RE) code be upgraded to a code which would allow him to reenlist.

APPLICANT STATES:  When he was being processed for discharge, he was told that he could have a new discharge and RE code in the future.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 September 1984.  

While in initial entry training, he accepted nonjudicial punishment on one occasion for dereliction of duty.  He was counseled on ten occasions for failing tests, failing to follow instructions, failing to pay attention to detail, failing to make his bunk, failing to display footgear, being asleep on fire guard, being out of uniform, sleeping in class, lack of self discipline, lack of motivation, and lack of responsibility.

On 16 November 1984, the applicant was given a mental status evaluation and was psychiatrically cleared.

On 26 November 1984, the applicant’s commander notified him of his intent to recommend his separation due to his lack of motivation and proper attitude, his inability to follow instructions, and his inability to pass tests.  His commander also provided him with the rights he had in conjunction with that recommendation.  The applicant waived all of his rights.

The applicant’s commander then forwarded a recommendation to discharge the applicant.  That recommendation was approved by the appropriate authority and the applicant was given a discharge for ELS Performance and Conduct on 5 December 1984.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 11 of that regulation provides for the separation of personnel in an ELS for unsatisfactory performance or conduct as evidenced by inability, lack of reasonable effort or a failure to adapt to the military environment.  These provisions apply only to individuals whose separation processing is started within 180 days of entry into active duty.  An uncharacterized separation is mandatory under this chapter.

Army Regulation 601-210, table 3-6, lists the various RE codes and describes the reason(s) a soldier is assigned a particular code.  The code of RE-1 is assigned to individuals who complete an initial term of active service and who were fully qualified to reenlist when last separated.  The code of RE-2 is assigned to individuals who were separated before completing a contracted period of service whose reenlistment is not contemplated.  Individuals who are assigned a code of RE-2 are fully qualified to reenlist without a waiver.  The code of RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s record of accepting nonjudicial punishment and being counseled on ten occasions clearly meets the criteria for separation due to ELS Performance and Conduct.

2.  The applicant does not allege that there was any error or injustice in his separation process, nor is any error or injustice evident to the Board.

3.  Contrary to the applicant’s contention, there is no automatic or “on demand” change in a veteran’s reason for discharge or RE code.  To warrant a correction of military records, it must be shown that an error or injustice exists in the contested record.

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

____mkp_  ___wtm__  ___teo __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003086319	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030729	
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.	A29.00	
2.	100.03	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.