MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           07 MARCH 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001066169

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 RE (Reenlistment Eligibility) Code be changed from RE-4 to RE-3.

APPLICANT STATES:  His discharge was recently upgraded and he would like the opportunity to enlist in the U.S. Army Reserve.  He states that he is a “productive member of this country” and that he would like to fulfill his “commitment to the United States Army and [his] country.”  In support of his request he submits a copy of the results of his appeal to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB).

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

He entered active duty on 26 October 1989.  In February 1991 he received a local bar to reenlistment, which he elected not to appeal.  The local bar to reenlistment was initiated because there was “no demonstrated potential for future service” and because he was pending a court-martial for wrongful use of cocaine after testing positive on three separate occasions.

In March 1991 the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of three specifications of wrongful use of cocaine.  His sentence included a bad conduct discharge.

On 12 November 1991 the applicant was discharged.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) reflects an RE Code of “4” and a SPD (Separation Program Designator) Code of JJD.

Subsequent to his separation, in August 2001, the ADRB concluded that although his discharge was proper, the characterization of his service was inequitable and in a unanimous vote, upgraded his bad conduct discharge to a general discharge.  The ADRB also noted that a change in the reason for discharge was not authorized under Federal statue.

As a result of the ADRB decision, the applicant’s original DD Form 214 was voided and a new separation report was prepared.  The new document reflected the upgrade in the applicant’s characterization of service, but his RE Code and SPD Code remained the same.

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 US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribed basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE Codes, including RA RE Codes.

RE-4 applies to individuals who were separated from their last period of service with a non-waivable disqualification.  This includes anyone previously discharged with a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge or soldiers who were separated from their term of service with a locally imposed bar to reenlistment in effect.  

Army Regulation 635-5-1 states that SPD Codes are three-character alphabetic combinations, which identify reasons for, and types of separation from active duty.  The primary purpose of SPD Codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation.  They are intended exclusively for the internal use of DOD and the military services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data.  It notes that “JJD” is the appropriate SPD Code for individuals separated as a result of a court-martial.

A “cross-reference” chart, provided by officials from the separations branch at the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command, confirms that “RE-4” is the appropriate RE Code for individuals who receive an SPD Code of JJD.

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.  The evidence confirms that the applicant’s RE Code was assigned based on the fact that he was separated from his last period of service with a non-waivable disqualification.  Not only did his separation result from a court-martial, he also had a local bar to reenlistment in effect at the time.  Notwithstanding the fact that the ADRB upgraded the character of his service, the applicant’s RE Code was appropriate considering the basis for his separation.  The Board finds no basis to correct the existing code.  The fact that he may be unable to enlist in the U.S. Army Reserve is not sufficient justification to change the applicant’s RE Code. 

2.  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 that requirement.

3.  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

__RVO__  ___JPI       ___RKS _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001066169	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020307	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.