IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 August 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090005092 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that her Reentry Eligibility (RE) code of 4 be changed to an RE code of 3. 2. The applicant states that the RE code she received was unfair and it needs to be fixed so that she may be able to serve her country again. She alleges that she was picked on in her unit, she was injured by her noncommissioned officer (NCO) for no reason, and no one did anything. As a result, she went absent without leave (AWOL) so her NCO would not harm her. Also, she alleges that a Soldier in her company tried to assault her. Although she went to the police and her chain of command, nothing was done. She was court-martialed and she was assigned an RE code of 4 which has ruined her chance to serve her country. She also states that her chain of command should have given her an Article 15 and transferred her to another unit. 3. The applicant provides no additional documents in support of her application. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 August 2001. She completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 92G (food service specialist). 2. Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows four periods of lost time under Title 10, United States Code 972 from 2 March to 19 March 2002, 27 March to 8 April 2002, 14 May to 12 June 2002; and 14 June to 18 June 2002. 3. The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows she was discharged on 22 July 2002 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court-martial with the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. She completed 9 months and 8 days of active military service with approximately 54 days of lost time. She was discharged with a separation code of "KFS" (For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial) and issued an RE code of 4. 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. 5. 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.” 6. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table established an RE code 4 as the proper reentry code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10 for the good of the service. 7. 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. 8. RE code 4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is not waivable. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions were carefully reviewed. However, there is no evidence of record to substantiate her contentions of being treated unfairly, that she was injured by her NCO, or that a member of her unit tried to assault her. 2. The applicant’s desire to have her RE code of 4 changed so that she may be allowed to serve her country again was considered; however, it does not serve as a basis for changing a properly assigned RE code regardless of the Army’s current enlistment policies. 3. The applicant's RE code was assigned based on her narrative reason for separation and the narrative reason for separation was based on her request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant has not established a basis upon which this reason should be changed. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting relief in this case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ____x____ ____x____ 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. _______ _ _x______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090005092 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090005092 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1