MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            26 June 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087362

	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. Joyce A. Hall		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison . 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. Lawrence Foster		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 under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.  The applicant also requests that his reentry codes "3" and "3B" be changed to a "1" or to a "2."

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he realizes that the excess leave was not authorized; however, if his discharge was for the good of the service, the RE codes he received should have allowed him to reenter the military at a later date.

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

On 31 August 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 
4 years.  He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11H10 (Heavy Anti-Armor Weapon Infantryman).  The highest pay grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.

On 19 January 1983, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 27 December 1982 to 3 January 1983.  His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $125.00 pay for 1 month and 14 days restriction and extra duty.

The applicant's service personnel record shows that a bar to reenlistment was approved on 9 February 1983.  However, the facts and circumstances are missing from his records.

On 24 June 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 2 May to 23 June 1983.

On 29 June 1983, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but he declined to do so.

On 15 July 1983, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of a trial by court-martial and directed the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  On 26 August 1983, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  He completed 10 months and 5 days of creditable active service and he had 58 days of lost time.  He was given reentry codes of RE-3 and RE-3B.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority of the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provided that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under
honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the soldier's
separation specifically allows such characterization.

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 U.S. 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.  

RE-3 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.  RE- 3B applies to service members who had lost time during their last enlistment.

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.  The Board considered the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge to honorable and to change his RE codes.

2.  The Board reviewed the applicant’s service records, which included one nonjudicial punishment for 7 days of AWOL, a bar to reenlistment, and one court-martial charge for 51 days of AWOL.  

3.  The applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

4.  The applicant acknowledged his guilt of the court-martial charge by submitting a request for discharge.  He was advised of the implications attached to the discharge.  He acknowledged in his own hand that he understood the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, that he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, and that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration and any benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.

5.  Based on the applicant's record of service, the Board determined that the applicant did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, the applicant did not meet the criteria for an honorable discharge.  The Board also determined that the applicant's service was not satisfactory; therefore, he did not meet the criteria for a general discharge.

6.  The applicant was discharged and assigned reentry codes in accordance with regulations in effect at the time.

7.  There is no basis for removal of the RE codes from the applicant's record.  The Board does not change valid RE codes solely to allow reenlistment.

8.  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.

9.  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

__LF____  __WTM__  __LE____ DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087362	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/06/26	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	100.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.