MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:           6 November 2003
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003088726

	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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Ms. Mae M. Bullock		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 Reentry Eligibility (RE) code be changed to RE-1, RE-2, or RE-3.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was told that he could reenlist in two years after his discharge date at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.  He states that he needs a RE code of RE-3 or less.  He contends that his RE code of "4" is wrong.

The applicant does not provide any documents in support of his application.

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 March 2001 for a period of 3 years.  

He was absent without leave (AWOL) on 18 May 2001 from Fort Benning, Georgia and was dropped from the unit rolls on 17 June 2001.  

On 3 December 2001, the applicant surrendered to military authorities and returned to military control at Fort Huachuca, Arizona.  The applicant was transferred to the Personnel Control Facility in Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 4 December 2001 for being AWOL from 18 May 2001 to 3 December 2001.

On 7 December 2001, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offenses charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Affairs if an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge were issued.  The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 29 March 2002, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed an UOTHC discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 15 April 2002.  He completed 6 months and 1 day of active military service with 199 days of lost time.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a separation code of “KFS” (For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial) and issued a 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.  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 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the separation program designator “KFS” as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as “For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial” and that the authority for discharge under this separation program designator is “AR 635-200, Chapter 10.” 
Additionally, SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table, dated March 2001, establishes RE Code 4 as the proper reentry code to assign to soldiers separated for this reason.

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 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.  

RE code 4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is not waivable.  

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.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a separation code of “KFS” (For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial) and was assigned a RE code of “4” in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time.

3.  The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board.  However, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the reentry code issued to him was administratively incorrect, or in error or unjust.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 is correct as currently constituted and there is no basis to change his reentry code.

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

SK____  RJW______  MMB_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003088726	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20031106	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	20020415	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200,chapter 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	For the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	100.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.