| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Terry L. Placek | Member |
2. The applicant requests that he be restored to active duty or that he be allowed to enlist by changing his reentry (RE) code.
3. The applicant states that the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgraded his discharge but was unable to act on his request to be restored to active duty. He provides the ADRB action as supporting evidence.
4. The applicant's military records show that he entered active duty on 1 April 1993. He had no record of disciplinary action until he was charged with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 8 – 31 August 1999 and with wrongfully using, with intent to deceive, a Request and Authority for Leave, DA Form 31, on 8 August 1999.
5. After consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. His unit commander and two intermediate commanders had recommended approval with issuance of a general discharge. The separation authority, however, approved the request and directed the applicant receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
6. On 24 November 1999, the applicant was discharged with a discharge under other than honorable conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 6 years, 7 months and 24 days of creditable active service and had 24 days of lost time. He was given a separation program designator (SPD) code of KFS (voluntary discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10) and a reentry code of 4.
7. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record during the current enlistment.
8. 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. RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is not waivable. RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is waivable. Soldiers discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 may receive a waiver to enlist.
9. Army Regulation 635-5, Table 2-2, SPD/RE Cross Reference Table, states that when the SPD is KFS then the RE code will be 3.
10. On 13 December 2000, the ADRB upgraded the applicant’s discharge to general under honorable conditions as a matter of equity. The ADRB noted that his unit commander and intermediate commanders had recommended approval with a general discharge and that his misconduct was mitigated by service of sufficient merit to warrant an upgrade.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Board notes that the ADRB had upgraded the applicant’s discharge to general under honorable conditions. However, he chose to request an administrative discharge, which included an admission of guilt, rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial. Although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, it would not be appropriate to allow him to change his mind after the fact and restore him to active duty.
2. The applicant was, however, given an incorrect reentry code. Based upon the reason he was separated, he is entitled to request a waiver to enlist. Since enlistment criteria does change, he should visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.
3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by amending the applicant’s DD Form 214 to show his reentry code as 3.
2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
__mkp___ __mhm___ __tlp___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
Margaret K. Patterson
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR 2001054294 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010712 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (GRANT) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.03 |
| 2. | 100.03 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010893C070208
Linda M. Baker d | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. 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. According to Army Regulations, the RE-4 assigned to the applicant at the time of his discharge is correct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091567C070212
The Board considered the following evidence: On 14 June 2001 the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10. It prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment, and includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057470C070420
The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded; and that his reentry code, separation code, and rank be corrected accordingly. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army on 27 July 1995 for 4 years. On 30 April 2001, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade to his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017062C071029
When discharged, the DD Form 214 he was issued showed he was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-210, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court- martial. The separation code "KFS" and a reentry code of 4 were applied to his DD Form 214. The applicant's discharge was reviewed by the ADRB and after careful consideration of his application, his military records, and all other available evidence, determined he had been properly and equitably discharged.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012082
The applicant requests his reentry code (RE code) "4" be changed to RE "3" so he can reenter the service. The applicant states his RE code was changed from "3" to "4" by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). On 11 April 2014, he was notified that the ADRB denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005780
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 July 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080005780 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was discharged from the service on temporary records on 15 March 2002 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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 | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010531
He requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 10, on the advice of his attorney. The ADRB determined the characterization of his service was too harsh and voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to under honorable conditions and to restore his rank to SSG. The evidence of record also shows that when the ADRB upgraded the applicant's discharge, the board determined the reason for the discharge was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003252
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicants DD Form 214 shows that, at age 17, on 22 March 2000, he was separated with a UOTHC discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. By regulation, the SPD code of KFS and an RE code of 4 will be assigned to members who are discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017773
The applicant requests, in effect, that his reentry (RE) code be changed so he can enlist. On 20 June 2006, he voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 10 (Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial). The regulation states the reason for discharge based on separation code "KFS" is "In lieu of trial by court-martial" and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002509C070206
On 24 May 2001, the separation authority approved the request for discharge in lieu of court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. On 18 September 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) determined that the applicant's reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. The date of application to the ABCMR is within three years of the decision of the ADRB; therefore, the applicant has timely filed.