MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           12 June 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002081091

	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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast		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 her Reentry Eligibility (RE) code be changed from RE-3 to RE-1.

APPLICANT STATES:  That her recruiter told her that she should add her other two children to her Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) when she got to basic training.  In support of her application, she submitted a personal statement and a DD Form 1172 (Application for Uniformed Services Identification Card).

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 February 2000 for a period of four years.  She successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 31U (Signal Support Systems Specialist).  The applicant was assigned to Germany on 15 March 2001.

On 19 July 2001, the applicant's unit commander notified her of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 7, due to fraudulent entry.  He cited as the specific reason her indicating she had only two children when in fact she had four children.  She was advised of her rights.  She acknowledged the notification of the pending separation action, consulted with legal counsel and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  

On 20 July 2001, the unit commander recommended that the applicant be discharged from active duty and that her service be characterized as honorable.

On 26 September 2001, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

The applicant was discharged on 26 September 2001 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 7, by reason of fraudulent entry.  She had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 10 days of creditable active service.  She was given an RE code of RE-3 and a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “JDA” (Fraudulent Entry).

On 16 October 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board changed the applicant's characterization of service from "general, under honorable conditions" to "honorable."

Army Regulation 635-5-1 (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 “JDA” as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as “Fraudulent Entry” and that the authority for discharge under this separation program designator is “AR 635-200, Chapter 7”.  Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes RE code 3 as the proper reentry code to assign to soldiers separated for this reason.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 7, paragraph 7-17, of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a fraudulent entry is the procurement of an enlistment, reenlistment, or period of active service through any deliberate material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment of information which, if known and considered by the Army at the time of enlistment or reenlistment, might have resulted in rejection.  This includes all disqualifying information requiring a waiver.  Soldiers separated under this chapter may be awarded an honorable discharge, or a general discharge, or a discharge under other than honorable conditions.    

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 prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.  The regulation states that RE–3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.

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 applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, chapter 7, for fraudulent entry.

2.  Records show the applicant was discharged with a separation code of "JDA" (Fraudulent Entry) and was assigned an RE code of RE-3 in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time.  

3.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record the reentry code issued to her was in error or unjust.

4.  However, the applicant's disqualification for reentry is waivable.  Therefore, if she still desires to reenter the Army, the Board recommends that she contact her local recruiter to determine if she is eligible for applying for a waiver under current enlistment 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

RVO____  JPI_____  ECP_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002081091	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030612	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	100.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.