2. The applicant requests that his reentry (RE) code of RE-3 be deleted from his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
3. The applicant states that he was separated under the Special Separation Benefits (SSB) program and should only have been assigned an RE-3S on his DD Form 214.
4. The applicants military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 September 1976 in pay grade E-1. He was awarded the military occupational specialties of unit supply specialist and material control and accounting specialist, and was promoted to pay grade E-6.
5. He served without incident through reenlistments and extensions and was honorably released from active duty on 29 September 1992 by reason of the fiscal year 1992 enlisted voluntary early transition program with $50,466.24 in severance pay. His DD Form 214 shows that he had completed a total of 16 years and 15 days of active service and was assigned RE codes of RE-3 and RE-3S.
6. The applicant served two tours of duty in Germany and one tour in Panama. He also served in Saudi Arabia during Operation Desert Storm. He was awarded five Army Achievement Medals, three Army Commendation Medals, and four Good Conduct Medals.
7. Army Regulation 601-210, table 3-6, lists the various RE codes and describes the reason(s) a soldier is assigned a particular code. The code of RE-1 is assigned to individuals who complete an initial term of active service and who were fully qualified to reenlist when last separated. The code RE-3S is assigned to those individuals who are voluntarily separated with an SSB payment. The code of 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, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters 9, 10, 13, and 14 of Army Regulation 635-200.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants records show he honorably completed several enlistments, was promoted to pay grade E-6, and received numerous awards and decorations. He had no disciplinary record and there is no record of any adverse administrative action, such as a letter of reprimand or a bar to reenlistment being taken against him. All in all, his record indicates unblemished service.
2. The applicants records do not contain any apparent reason why he would have been assigned anything other than an RE-3S code, based on his separation with SSB benefits.
3. In view of the foregoing, it appears the applicant was assigned an RE code of RE-3 in error.
4. In view of the preceding, it would be in the interest of justice to correct his records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by deleting the RE-3 code on the DD Form 214 of the individual concerned for the period of service ending 29 September 1992, so that his DD Form 214 shows that he was only assigned a code of RE-3S.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
CHAIRPERSON
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057042C070420
The applicant requests that his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, be corrected to show he was separated under the Voluntary Separation Incentive (VSI) and not the Special Separation Benefit (SSB). The applicant states, in effect, that he initially requested separation under the VSI but changed his mind at the Fort Dix, NJ separation and transfer point and requested the SSB. His DD Form 214, item 18 shows he was authorized the SSB.
Had he been properly briefed and his commander not wrongfully threatened disciplinary action and misrepresented information regarding his continued eligibility to serve in the Reserve, he would not have separated but instead remained on active duty until he was eligible to retire for length of service. The evidence of record fails to show that any error or injustice occurred in his separation processing that would support his current request for retirement consideration. When enlisted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064339C070421
The applicant states, in effect, that as a result of the incorrect SPD code assignment and entry into her separation document, she received a notice of debt in the amount of $21,655.11 from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), Denver, Colorado. She claims that, she was authorized to receive a Special Separation Benefit (SSB) payment of $22,000.00 at separation, but because of the assignment of the incorrect SPD code number, DFAS officials continue to indicate, she is indebted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068162C070402
In order to qualify, a soldier must: have served on active duty for more than 6 but less than 20 years; have served at least 5 years of continuous active duty immediately preceding the date of separation; if a Reserve, be on the active duty list; and meet such other requirements as the Secretary may prescribe from time to time, which may include requirements relating to -- years of service; skill or rating; grade or rank; and remaining period of obligated service. DISCUSSION : Considering...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9506342C070209
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant enlisted on 5 November 1984 for a period of 3 years. Although not explained in the available records, orders were published on 25 June 1991 which authorized the applicant to separate from the service prior to his ETS, on 28 November 1991, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, and considering that there were no early release programs announced at the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016862
The applicant requests that he be awarded the Armed Forces Service Medal (AFSM) and that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show in block 8a (Last Duty Assignment and Major Command) the entry Camp David HQ instead of Camp Davis HQ as currently reflected. The applicant states, in effect, that he served on active duty during the period of 1981 to 1992 and at the time of his discharge he was serving with the White House Communications...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012005
He states, in effect, that: * the city on his DD Form 214 in item 7b HOR is misspelled * although he was awarded three ARCOMs, his DD Form 214 only shows two * he chose to leave the Army reluctantly, yet voluntarily under the SSB due to medical and personal hardship reasons * although his separation orders mentioned his SSB pay was subject to recoupment if he became eligible for retired pay, there was no mention of repayment of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits * the VA has rated...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00912
He had completed a total of 2 years, 3 months and 7 days of service at the time of his discharge from the Army National Guard. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that his pay date of 5 November 1982 must have been the date the Base CBPO was going on when he was told to attend a meeting on the SSB/VSI...
He had completed a total of 2 years, 3 months and 7 days of service at the time of his discharge from the Army National Guard. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that his pay date of 5 November 1982 must have been the date the Base CBPO was going on when he was told to attend a meeting on the SSB/VSI...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020155
The applicant states his rank at the time of his separation from active duty on 2 March 1992 was specialist (SPC)/pay grade E-4. The applicant contends that the rank of PFC (E-3) and RE Code of "RE-3C" shown on his DD Form 214 should be corrected because he held the rank of SPC (E-4) at the time of his voluntary separation under the 1990 Early Transition Program and he should not be penalized with the RE code that he was issued. There is no evidence that the applicant was reduced in rank...