Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
Mrs. Joyce A. Hall | Analyst |
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | |
Mr. John T. Meixell | Member | |
Mr. Eric N. Anderson | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code, which would allow reenlistment. In effect, this constitutes a request for removal or waiver of those disqualifications, which preclude reenlistment.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his characterization of service was changed to honorable by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). He is requesting a change in his RE code he wants to continue his military career. In support of his application he submits documents of his case from the ADRB.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 September 1989, for 4 years. He served through continuous reenlistments until he was separated from active duty on
19 February 2002. The highest pay grade he achieved was E-6.
On 2 July 2001, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for wrongful use of a controlled substance (cocaine) between 16 April and 5 May 2001. His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-5, a forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 1 month), and 45 days restriction and extra duty.
On 31 July 2001, the applicant received a letter of reprimand for wrongful use of a controlled substance (cocaine) as indicated by a urine sample given during a command directed urinalysis conducted on 15 May 2001.
On 14 August 2001, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 14, Para 14-12c for misconduct (commission of a serious offense). The commander's recommendation was based on the applicant's positive testing for cocaine. He was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him. The applicant acknowledged notification; he requested consideration, personal appearance and representation by legal counsel before a board of officers. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but declined to do so.
The applicant's unit commander subsequently recommended that the applicant be retained in the service. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended that the applicant be retained in the service. However, if discharged he recommended characterization of the applicant's service as honorable. The senior intermediate commander recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
On 31 October 2001, the applicant was notified to appear before a board of officers, and advised of his rights. The board recommended separation with an
under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 7 January 2002, the separations authority recommended approval of the board's recommendation
for separation with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
On 19 February 2002, the applicant was discharged. He completed 1 year and 27 days of active military service in the period under review and had a total of
15 years, 2 months and 18 days of active military service.
The applicant applied to ADRB for a characterization change and a reentry code change. The ADRB gave full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of offense. The ADRB determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the applicant's generally accepted personal conduct and performance of duty mitigated his conduct. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to full honorable. The Board also determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted unanimously not to change the narrative reason on 21 June 2002.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
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 US 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-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.
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 noted the decision by the ADRB to change the characterization of service to honorable and restoring the applicant's pay grade to E-5. The Board also noted that the ADRB voted unanimously not to change the reason for discharge in this case. After review of the entire case, this Board finds no evidence that his narrative reason for discharge was improper or was inequitable.
2. The applicant was discharged and assigned a reentry code in accordance with regulations in effect.
3. There is no basis for removal of the RE code from the applicant's record. The disqualification upon which the code was based, however, can be waived for reenlistment purposes.
4. 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.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
___MHM_ __JTM __ __ENA__ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
CASE ID | AR2002078101 |
SUFFIX | |
RECON | YYYYMMDD |
DATE BOARDED | 2002/11/05 |
TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2002/02/19 |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Para 14-12C(2) |
DISCHARGE REASON | |
BOARD DECISION | DENY |
REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
ISSUES 1. | 100.0300 |
2. | |
3. | |
4. | |
5. | |
6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002943
The applicant requests change of his separation program designator (SPD) code of JKK and reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3 to codes which would permit him to join the Army Reserve or Army National Guard. The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 February 2000. On 23 September 2002, the appropriate authority approved his immediate separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 14,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066169C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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 Army Regulation 635-5-1 states that SPD Codes are three-character alphabetic combinations, which identify reasons for, and types of separation from active duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060006050C070205
In his request the applicant stated he understood he could request discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial because charges had been filed against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which could authorize the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. The applicant stated that he understood that if his request were accepted, he could be discharged under conditions other than honorable. In this agreement, he entered a plea of guilty to the charge and its...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002031
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his Reentry (RE) Code 4 be changed so that he may reenlist in the Army. The SPD code of JKK was the appropriate code for the applicant based upon the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 for soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007100
On 30 July 2002, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with paragraph 14-12(c) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for misconduct citing his wrongful use of cocaine. On 13 October 2006, the ADRB granted the applicant relief in the form of an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable. The "JKK" SPD code is the correct code for Soldiers separating under chapter 14-12(c) of Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005529
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides the following: * Self-authored and personal statements * ADRB Case Report and Directive * DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination), undated and unsigned * DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip) * State of Michigan, Petition and Order for Discharge from Probation, dated 2 January 2004 * Application and Order Setting Aside Conviction, dated 27 September 2004 * Affidavits, dated 28 August 2002 and 6 September 2002 *...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075784C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080238C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. The applicant has also failed to show, through the evidence submitted with his application or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040006338C070208
Records contain a memorandum, dated 30 July 1991, from United States Army Trial Defense Service, wherein the applicant's legal counsel raised the issue that he should be separated by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), rather then be administratively separated under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012311
On 24 January 2006, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ, for using cocaine between on or about 25 July 2005 and on or about 26 August 2005. On 7 April 2006, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of patterns of misconduct-commission of a serious offense and directed the applicant be furnished an Under Other than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. ...