APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his reentry (RE) code of RE-3 be changed to a code which would allow him to reenlist.

APPLICANT STATES:  There is no error or injustice in his case.  He was discharged because he failed to zero his weapon, a requirement for completion of basic combat training (BCT).  Since his discharge he has practiced firing weapons at a range and is confident that he can now zero his weapon.  A career in the military has always been his dream and he asks for another chance to make that dream come true.

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

He enlisted in the Army Reserve 27 September 1991 with no prior service.

He entered on his initial active duty for training on 31 July 1992.  While in BCT, he failed his first scheduled Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT), with comments added to his APFT scorecard that he had poor upper body strength and form, and he had poor abdominal strength.  The applicant did not take the second scheduled APFT because of medical reasons.  A trainee evaluation report he was given shows that he was rated marginal in three of seven ranked areas, the marginal areas being motivation, team work, and self discipline.  While assigned to that BCT company, he was counseled on seven occasions, once for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed, once for failing to shave, and five for failing to qualify with his weapon.

On 4 September 1992 the applicant was assigned to another BCT company.  He received additional training on his weapon, but again failed to qualify with it.

The applicant's commander then notified him of his intention to recommend his discharge due to his inability to adapt to the military.  

On 18 September 1992 the applicant's commander recommended his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, chapter 11, Entry Level Status Performance and Conduct.  That recommendation was based on his inability to adapt to the military as evidenced by his failure to qualify with his weapon.  

That recommendation was approved by the appropriate authority and the applicant was given an uncharacterized discharge on 25 September 1992 in pay grade E-1.  His DD Form 214 shows he was assigned an RE code of RE-3.  He had 1 month and 25 days active duty.

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 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.

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable. Certain persons who have received nonjudicial punishment are so disqualified, as are persons with bars to reenlistment, those discharged in entry level status, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters 9, 10, 13, and 14 of Army Regulation 635-200.

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

1.  The applicant's effort to better his marksmanship after his discharge is commendable and has been carefully considered by the Board.  However this, in itself, is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant changing a properly assigned RE code.

2.  In addition, the applicant was also deficient in functional areas other than marksmanship.  There is no indication that the applicant has improved in those areas.

3.  The applicant’s RE-3 code is correct and there is no reason to correct it.

4.  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

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director