MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 September 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-05839 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. 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: The applicant requests, in effect, that the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of MDS and the reentry (RE) code of 3 given him at the time of separation be changed. APPLICANT STATES: The applicant states, in effect, that the MDS SPD code stands for a bar to reenlistment at the time of discharge and his bar was lifted prior to his discharge. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant’s military records show that he reenlisted on 9 December 1994 for 3 years and for an overseas assignment of choice to Korea, while stationed in Friedberg, Germany. At the time of his enlistment the applicant had completed 3 years, 3 months, and 17 days of honorable service and had attained the rank of specialist/E-4. The evidence of record contains a memorandum prepared by the senior retention noncommissioned officer (NCO) which indicates that the applicant had been erroneously reenlisted before entering the 8 month reenlistment window. The memorandum goes on to explain that the erroneous reenlistment was based on an administrative error and there was no evidence of deception by anyone involved in the process. The senior retention NCO indicated the chain of command was notified and provided the options available to the applicant. On 3 April 1995 the applicant was counseled on the various options available to him. The applicant indicated that he did not wish to waive his reenlistment option or the commitment made to him at the time of his reenlistment and that he desired and requested separation from the service, under the provisions of paragraph 7-15, AR 635-200, by reason of an erroneous reenlistment. The applicant’s unit commander concurred with the applicant’s request for separation and recommended that the applicant’s service be characterized as honorable. The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request and directed his release from active duty with an HD. Accordingly, on 21 August 1995 the applicant was discharged after completing 4 years of active military service. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued the applicant documented the authority for separation as AR 635-200, Chapter 7, Section IV; the SPD code MDS; and an RE code of 3 (ineligible for enlistment unless a waiver is granted). AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (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 MDS was the appropriate code for the applicant based on the guidance provided in AR 635-5-1 for soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 7, Section IV for a defective enlistment agreement. Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), AR 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, Section IV establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for defective or unfulfilled enlistment or reenlistment agreements. 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 Board concludes that the SPD code of MDS was the appropriate code, in accordance with the guidance contained in AR 635-5-1, for soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 7, Section IV for a defective enlistment agreement. 2. In view of the circumstances in this case, the assigned reentry eligibility code was and still is appropriate. This is supported by the guidance contained in Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), AR 635-5 (Separation Documents). 3. 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 the aforementioned requirement. 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 Loren G. Harrell Director