MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            14 February 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2001063814

	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. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. John E. Denning		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 be changed from RE-3 to RE-1.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that an RE-3 was entered in his separation document (DD Form 214) automatically without regard for his service.  

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

On 30 October 1997, he entered the Regular Army and that he continuously served on active duty for 4 years until 29 October 2001, at which time he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) at the expiration of his term of service (ETS).

The DD Form 214 issued to and authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation confirms that he held the rank of private first class/
E-3 (PFC/E-3) and was serving in the military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M (Motor Transport Operator) on that date.  This document also verifies that the authority and reason for his separation was chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of completion of required active service.  The DD Form 214 also indicates that he was assigned the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of LBK and a corresponding RE-3 code.

In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was requested and received from the Chief, Retention Management Division, Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), dated 5 December 2001.  It indicated that the applicant was separated in the rank and grade of PFC/E-3 and was ineligible for reenlistment due to retention control point (RCP) policy in effect at the time. Therefore, he was properly assigned a RE code of RE-3 code.  

On 19 December 2001, the applicant was provided a copy of the PERSCOM advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to review its contents and to submit a rebuttal if he so desired; however, to date he has failed to respond.  

Army Regulation 635-200 prescribes the policy and procedure for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel and chapter 4 contains guidance on separating members at the completion of their required service.  Pertinent Army regulations also provide that prior to discharge or REFRAD, 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.

Army Regulation 601-280 prescribes the policy and procedures for the Army’s Retention Program.  Paragraph 3-8 contains the reenlistment criteria based on rank and it states, in pertinent part, that a soldier may not exceed the RCP shown in Table 3-1, by more than 29 days, before the expiration of contracted service; and Table 3-1 lists the RCP for members in the rank and pay grade of PFC/E-3 as 3 years.  

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.  The SPD code of LBK was the appropriate code for the applicant based on the guidance provided in this regulation for soldiers separating under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of completion of required active service who are ineligible to reenlist.  Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), establishes the
RE code of RE-3 as the proper reentry code to assign to soldiers separated under this authority and for this reason.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he was inappropriately automatically assigned an RE-3 code and his desire that this code be changed to RE-1.  However, by regulation, members separating at the completion of their required active service who are ineligible to reenlist are assigned a SPD code of LBK and a corresponding RE code of RE-3.  

2.  The evidence of record confirms that at the time of  his separation, the applicant had completed 4 years of active military service and as a result was appropriately assigned the SPD code LBK and a RE-3 code.  These code assignments were based on his being ineligible for reenlistment due to exceeding the PFC/E-3 RCP of 3 years.  

3.  The record further shows that the applicant’s SPD and RE code assignments were accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations.  Therefore, the Board finds that his RE-3 code assignment was and still is appropriate, and it concludes that there is no basis for changing it at this time. 
4.  However, as indicated in the PERSCOM advisory opinion, the applicant’s disqualification for reentry is waivable.  Therefore, if he still desires to reenter the Army, the Board recommends that he contact his local recruiter to determine if he is eligible for applying for a waiver under current enlistment policy and criteria. 

5.  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.

6.  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

__JNS___  __BJE___  __JED___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063814	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/02/14	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	2001/10/29	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C4	
DISCHARGE REASON	ETS	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  04	100.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.