MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           21 March 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065437

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, be amended to show his rank and grade as Specialist, E-4 and that his reentry (RE) code be changed to RE 1.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his highest grade earned was E-4 and he was not demoted.  Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) case number AR2001061359 shows his highest grade held as E-4.  The time restriction for an RE-3 has now been met.  He provides no supporting evidence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 March 1990.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 88K (Watercraft Operator).  His Personnel Qualification Record Part II, DA Form 2-1, shows he was advanced to Private, E-2 on 1 November 1990 and to Private First Class, E-3 on 14 February 1991.

A copy of the applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record Part I, DA Form 2A, dated 10 November 1992 shows the applicant’s grade as Specialist Four and his date of rank as 1 November 1992. 

A General Counseling Form, DA Form 4856, dated 3 November 1992 shows the applicant was counseled on 2 November 1992 for passing checks with insufficient funds.  His grade is noted as E-3 on the form.  The applicant signed the form on 3 November 1992 listing his grade as E-3.  

A DA Form 4856 dated 4 November 1992 shows the applicant was counseled on 4 November 1992 for failing to appear for physical training formation.  The applicant signed the form on 4 November 1992 listing his grade as E-3.  

On 10 November 1992, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failing to appear for a movement and for missing physical training formation.  The Article 15 notes the applicant’s grade as E-3.  

On 25 November 1992, a local bar to reenlistment was initiated on the applicant. His rank was noted as E-3 on the paperwork.  

An Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard, DA Form 705, shows the applicant completed the Army Physical Fitness Test on 19 February, 5 March, 30 April, and 26 May 1993.  His grade is noted as E-3 for all four tests.

On 23 June 1993, action was initiated to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.  His rank and grade are noted as Private First Class, E-3 on all related documents to include his separation orders and his DD Form 214.  On    8 July 1993, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge under honorable conditions.  His DD Form 214 shows his rank as Private First Class and his grade as E-3 (with an incorrect date of rank listed as 1 January 1991).  He was given an RE code of 3.  The applicant signed the DD Form 214.

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 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, including RA RE codes.

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  Soldiers who separate under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 or who separate with a local bar to reenlistment in effect fall into this category.

Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.  They are required to process a request for waiver under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program. 

The applicant applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge.  On            12 October the ADRB determined that his discharge should be upgraded to fully honorable.  In the ADRB’s case write-up it was noted that the highest grade achieved by the applicant was E-4.

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.  Only one document in the applicant’s records indicated that he was promoted to Specialist, E-4 on 1 November 1992.  Promotion orders are not available.  Every other document subsequent to 1 November 1992, including documents the applicant signed, indicated he was a Private First Class, E-3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes that orders may have been issued promoting the applicant to E-4 but were subsequently revoked.  The ADRB’s listing of his highest grade achieved as E-4, without substantiating evidence, is insufficient for the Board to grant the relief requested.

3.  The Board notes that the applicant’s date of rank to Private First Class, E-3 as listed on his DD Form 214 is incorrect.  As the applicant does not request that correction, however, the Board will take no action on that error.

4.  In view of the reason for the applicant’s separation and the fact he had a local bar to reenlistment in effect at the time of his separation, the assigned reentry code of RE-3 was and still is appropriate.  The applicant was disqualified from reenlistment, but the disqualification is waivable.  Since enlistment criteria does change, and since an individual has the right to apply for a waiver, the applicant should periodically visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.

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

__jns___  __lds___  __jtm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065437	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020321	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.	100.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.