RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 August 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050000891 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, to change her reentry (RE) code to RE-1 and the reason for her separation changed from misconduct to "other." 2. The applicant states that her discharge was upgraded from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant continues she would like to become a commissioned officer on active duty in the United States Air Force, but the RE-3 code prohibits her from being commissioned as an officer. 3. The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); an 11 January 2005, letter from Central Michigan University which shows she was awarded a Master of Science Degree; a copy of her Bachelor of Science Degree from Northwestern State University; and four letters of recommendation in support of this application. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 6 November 1999, the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), by reason of misconduct. The separation document (DD Form 214) she was issued at the time confirms she held the rank of specialist/ pay grade E-4, and had completed a total of 3 years, 1 month, and 12 days of active military service. The DD Form 214 also shows that based on the authority and reason for her separation, she was assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of JKA [patterns of misconduct, Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12b] and an RE code of RE-3. 2. Records show the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for wrongfully obtaining services from a dining facility, disobeying a lawful order, and making a false official statement. 3. On 3 May 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) considered the applicant’s case. The ADRB determined the characterization of service was too harsh and voted to upgrade the characterization of her service to fully honorable. However, the ADRB voted unanimously not to change the authority and reason for her separation. Additionally, the ADRB did not address changing the applicant's RE-Code. 4. The new DD Form 214 issued to the applicant based on the ADRB action confirms the authority for the applicant’s characterization of service was changed to honorable. There were no other changes made to this document. 5. The provided four letters of recommendation which each state the applicant is a woman of high morals and values. Each of the authors also states the applicant demonstrated what it takes to become an officer. 6. 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 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program) 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 who are disqualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable. 7. 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 JKA is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers who separated under the provisions of paragraph 14-12b, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of patterns of misconduct. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table included in the regulation stipulates that the RE code assignment will be based on the Department of the Army directive authorizing separation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s request to upgrade her RE code because the RE-3 code she was assigned prohibits her being commissioned as an officer in the United States Air Force. The supporting documents she provided were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence to support relief beyond that granted as a result of the ADRB action on this case. 2. The evidence of record confirms the ADRB voted to upgrade the applicant’s discharge to fully honorable. However, the ADRB directive authorizing this action did not authorize a change to the applicant’s RE code or the authority and reason because they were found to be proper and equitable. 3. The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation. All requirements of law and regulation were met, and her rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. 4. By regulation, the RE code assigned to members separated by reason of JKA Patterns of misconduct is RE-3. In this case, the RE-3 code assigned the applicant was and remains valid based on the authority and reason for her separation. 5. RE codes are a management tool used in the enlistment/reenlistment of Soldiers. These codes are used for administrative purposes only and are not ordinarily used to deny a personnel action. If the applicant is being denied a commission in the United States Air Force, it is likely based on the fact she was separated from active service in the United States Army for patterns of misconduct. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __MKP__ __REB___ __LMB__ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _M. K. Patterson_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20050000891 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20050825 TYPE OF DISCHARGE HD DATE OF DISCHARGE 1999/12/17 DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200 para 14-12b. . . . . DISCHARGE REASON Patterns of misconduct BOARD DECISION Deny REVIEW AUTHORITY Mr. Chun ISSUES 1. 110.0000.0000 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.