MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:      

		BOARD DATE:            9 October 2003                  
		DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003088163

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert J. Osborn		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast . 		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 his reentry (RE) code of RE-4 be changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was told he would not receive a bad 
RE code.  

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

He initially entered active duty in the Regular Army on 12 May 1994.  He was trained and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y (Supply Specialist). 

The applicant’s Personnel Qualification record shows that the highest pay grade he held while on active duty was E-4, which he attained on 20 July 1996.  It also shows that he earned the following awards during his tenure on active duty:  Army Service Ribbon; National Defense Service Medal; and Army Good Conduct Medal.  There are no other acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition documented in the record.  

A separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge is not on file.  However, the record does include a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) that confirms the authority and reason for the applicant’s discharge.

The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on the date of his separation, 
17 September 2001, confirms that he completed a total of 6 years, 8 months, 
and 13 days of creditable active military service. and that he accrued a total of 233 days of time lost due to being absent without leave (AWOL).  

This document also verifies that the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) under the provisions of the chapter 10, 
Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  It further confirms that he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KFS and an
RE code of RE-4.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, 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.  An under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate for members separating under this provision of the regulation. 

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-4 applies to persons who are disqualified from further Army service.  

Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code of KFS is the appropriate code to assign to soldiers separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table establishes RE-4 as the RE code to be assigned members separated with this SPD code.

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 notes the applicant’s claim that he was told he would not receive a bad RE code.  However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.  

2.  The evidence of record includes a properly constituted separation document that confirms the authority and reason for the applicant’s discharge, and the applicant does not dispute the basis for his discharge.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulations were met, and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

3.  By regulation, SPD code KFS and RE-4 code are the proper codes to assign members separating under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 
635-200, in lieu or trial by court-martial.  As a result, the Board finds that the 
RE code of RE-4 assigned the applicant at discharge was and still is appropriate based on the authority and reason for his separation. 

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 this 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

_ECP___  ___RO__  __RJO__    DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003088163	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003/10/DD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	2001/09/17	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, C10 	
DISCHARGE REASON	In Lieu of Court-Martial 	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  04	100.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.