| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Gail J. Wire | Member | |
| Mr. Robert J. Osborn, II | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That Item 27 (Reentry Eligibility (RE) Code) on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from a code of RE-4 to a code of RE-1 so that he will be eligible to reenlist.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was absent without leave (AWOL) because he was ill during Christmas. He adds that he was informed that "he would be dropped from the program" and that he felt ashamed. He now realizes that being sick is a human condition and he now has the ambition to reenter the Army. He submits in support of his request enlistment medical records, a copy of his DD Form 214, and a copy of his request for leave, dated 5 April 2001.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 21 June 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program (DEP). On 8 November 2000, he was discharged from the DEP and he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 4 years, and training in an Infantry military occupational specialty (MOS).
The evidence available indicates that the applicant was AWOL from his unit from 4 January through 3 April 2001. Upon his return to military control court-martial charges were preferred against him for being AWOL. He requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 13 April 2001, the applicant was voluntarily placed on excess leave pending separation under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.
The applicant's records do not contain all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process. However, his records do contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 that was prepared at the time of separation. The DD Form 214 shows that, on 9 January 2002, he was separated with a under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge, in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 and assigned an RE code of RE-4. He had completed a total of 11 months and 2 days of active military service and he had 89 days of lost time due to being AWOL.
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 an administrative discharge 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. Although, an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was then considered appropriate.
Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on the reason for discharge. Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlisting and processing into the RA and the eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of Armed Forces RE codes and RA RE codes.
An RE code of RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service. Those individuals discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, with a UOTHC discharge, in lieu of trial by court-martial, are assigned RE-4 codes and are disqualified from further service. The disqualification is nonwaivable.
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 available records show that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, with an administrative discharge due to conduct triable by court-martial. Although, the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process are missing, he would have been charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. He would have consulted with defense counsel and signed a statement indicating that he had been informed that he could receive a UOTHC discharge and the ramifications of receiving such a discharge. He would have voluntarily requested discharge to avoid trial by court-martial. In doing so, he would have admitted guilt to the stipulated offense(s) under the UCMJ. The Board presumes administrative regularity and the applicant has provided no information that would indicate the contrary of his characterization of service nor his RE-code.
3. The applicant's record does not indicate that he had a medical problem that prevented him from being able to complete his military training and he has provided no evidence to the contrary.
4. The evidence available indicates that the applicant's assigned RE-code of
RE-4 was appropriate at the time of separation and that it is still appropriate.
5. 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
__rvo___ __gjw___ __rjo___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002076357 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030213 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 20020109 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chap 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A71.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7100 |
| 2. | 100.0300 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003540
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. The applicant's contentions that his record should be corrected to show he was separated while in an ELS, that his service was described as uncharacterized, and that he be issued an RE-3 code because he had been coerced into requesting discharge and that he can be rehabilitated was carefully considered. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012399
A DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) shows the Commander, Personnel Control Facility, Fort Sill, OK, charged the applicant with one specification each of being AWOL from 4 August to 13 December 2009. On 17 December 2009, after consulting with counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The regulation provides that prior to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005482
He states that he will do anything necessary to have his RE code changed from an RE-4 to an RE-3 so that he can reenlist in the Army. On 26 June 2008, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and directed the applicant be furnished an UOTHC discharge, and on 18 July 2008, the applicant was discharged accordingly. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
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 | CY2009 | 20090009805
On 24 January 2008, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he receive a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. 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. By regulation, the SPD code of KFS and the RE code of RE-4 are the proper codes to assign members...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106084C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Those individuals discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, with a UOTHC discharge, in lieu of trial by court-martial, are assigned RE-4 codes and are disqualified from further service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085965C070212
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: With his application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), he stated that he served in the Army from 30 September 1992 until 20 July 1998.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001920
The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued on the date of his discharge confirms he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also shows he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KFS and an RE code of RE-4. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012025
In his discharge request, the applicant acknowledged his understanding that by submitting a request for discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge against him, or of a lesser included offense therein contained which also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. An UOTHC discharge normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code KFS is the appropriate code to assign to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089505C070403
There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence also indicates that the applicant's assigned RE-code of RE-4 was appropriate at the time of separation and that it is still appropriate. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the relief requested, and therefore, it would not be in the interest of...