MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            23 OCTOBER 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087899

	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. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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 her records be corrected by upgrading her discharge, and by changing her RE-code to allow her reenlistment.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that her problems in the military stemmed from marital and financial problems, and her immaturity and lack of understanding concerning a project she worked on at Fort Detrick, that involved two breeds of monkeys that eventually died, which caused her to be sent to the hospital on two occasions because she was unable to cope with their deaths.  She also states that when she was called to Fort Bragg for her discharge she was relieved, but had no idea that it would be under other than honorable conditions.  Now that she is old enough and knowledgeable enough to be longsuffering and patient, she wants to be able to reenlist to help her country.  The applicant submits no evidence in support of her request. 

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

She enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 May 1978, for a period of 3 years.  She completed basic combat training at Fort McClellan, Alabama, and advanced individual training at Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

On 27 September 1983, her commander preferred court-martial charges against her for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 13 March 1979 to 26 September 1983.  

On 28 September 1983, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  She was advised of her rights, and indicated she understood the possible ramifications of receiving an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

On 29 November 1983, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s request and directed her reduction to the lowest enlisted grade, and the issuance of an under other than honorable condition discharge.

On 9 December 1983, the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge, under the provisions of the above cited regulation.  Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates she had 1 year and 11 days of active service, over 800 days of lost time, and was assigned RE-Codes 3, 3B and 3C, and the Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code ”KFS”.

Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provided, in pertinent part, that a member who had committed and offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC).

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.

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 indicates that a person had lost time during their last enlistment.

RE-3C applies to persons who have completed more than 4 months service who do not meet the basic eligibility pay grade requirements of chapter 2, Army Regulation 601-280, or who have been denied reenlistment under the Qualitative Retention Process according to chapter 10, Army Regulation 601-280.

Army Regulation 635-5-1 states that SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations, which identify reasons for, and types of separation from active duty.  The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation.  They are intended exclusively for the internal use of DOD and the military services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data.  It notes that “KFS” is the appropriate SPD code for individuals separated in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

A “cross-reference” table, provided by officials from the separations branch at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command-Alexandria, confirms that “RE-3” is the appropriate RE code for individuals who have lost time due to AWOL or confinement.

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 applicant’s voluntary request for separation under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  

2.  There is no basis for correcting or removing the RE codes from the applicant's record.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the assigned reentry eligibility codes were and still are appropriate.  The disqualification upon which the codes were based, however, could be waived for reenlistment purposes.

3.  The Board notes, however, that she may be eligible to apply for a waiver for enlistment, and that she should visit her nearest military recruiting office for further eligibility information.

4.  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 that requirement.

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

__JHL __  __MKP __  __AAO __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087899	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20031023	
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.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.