MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           3 December 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002077783

	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. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Charmane Collins		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:  In effect, that his reentry (RE) code be changed and that additional training be added to his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his training in military occupational specialties (MOSs) 52D (Power Generation Equipment Repairer) and 63B (Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) should be added to his DD Form 214.  He provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a Certificate of Training showing he completed an 80-hour Generator Maintenance Course on 12 February 1988 as supporting evidence.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  That the applicant's active duty records are not associated with his current file and thus it is unable to be ascertained the reason for the bar to reenlistment indicated on his DD Form 214.  There is also no documentation to show he received training in MOS 63B; however, it cannot be ruled out without reviewing his complete active duty file.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records for his Regular Army service, other than a portion of his enlistment contract, are not available.  Information contained herein was obtained from alternate sources.

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 February 1985 for training in MOS 62B (Construction Equipment Repairer).  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 62B.  

The applicant was released from active duty on 17 October 1992 upon his expiration term of service, in the rank of Specialist Four, E-4, with 7 years,          7 months, and 23 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214, item       14 shows he completed the Construction Equipment Repairer Course and the   2-week Generator Maintenance Course in February 1988.  He was given RE code 3C.

The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 18 October 1992.  His Personnel Qualification Record, DA Form 2-1, from his Army National Guard service shows he completed the 9-week Construction Equipment Repairer course in 1985 and the 2-week General Maintenance Course in 1988.  He reviewed his DA Form 2-1 on 3 December 1992.  He was discharged from the Army National Guard on 11 March 1994.

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.

At the time, RE code 3C applied to soldiers who did not meet the reentry grade and service criteria.  At the time, the retention control point for E-4s was 8 years of active Federal service.  The applicant was not qualified for continued Army service but the disqualification was waivable.  

RE code 3C is no longer used.  Only one RE code, RE 3, is used for individuals not qualified for continued Army service but the disqualification is waivable.

Army Regulation 635-5, paragraph 2-6c(3), states that the U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) may make a correction to the RE code after a soldier has separated.

Army Regulation 15-185, the regulation under which this Board operates, states that the Board will not consider any application if it determines that an applicant has not exhausted all administrative remedies available.  

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. 

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.  The applicant was given the correct RE code when he separated from the Regular Army as an E-4 with over 7 years of active service.  The retention control point for E-4s was 8 years of active Federal service.  

3.  Regulatory guidance has since changed and now provides that RE code 3 applies to all individuals with a waivable disqualification.  If the applicant desires, he may address a request to change his RE code from 3C to 3 to Commander, PERSCOM, ATTN:  TAPC-EPR-P, 200 Stovall Street, Alexandria, VA  22331-0457.  He would still have a waivable disqualification to reenlistment; however, it would be under the current regulatory standards.  If for some reason PERSCOM could not act on his request or did not resolve it to his satisfaction, he could reapply to the Board, with the final action taken by PERSCOM as supporting evidence, for consideration.

4.  As an alternative to the above, RE 3C is still a waivable disqualification.  Since enlistment criteria does change, and since an individual has the right to apply for a waiver, if the applicant desires to reenlist he should visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.

5.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant provides none to show he completed training in MOSs 52D and/or 63B.  It is noted that he reviewed his DA Form 2-1 on 3 December 1992 and neither of the requested courses were listed on his DA Form 2-1 at that time.  The course for which he provides a Certificate of Training as supporting evidence is already listed on his DD Form 214.  

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

__ FNE  _  __JEA___  ___CC__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077783	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/12/02	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.	100.03	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.