MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 4 November 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003089455

         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. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson
Ms. Gail J. Wire		Member
Mr. Antonio Uribe		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, correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow him to enlist in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) or the Army National Guard (ARNG) so that he can complete his last three years of military service.

APPLICANT STATES: That he was discharged from the Army under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) after giving all he had to the Army. He states that the least the Army could do is to hear his request to join the USAR or the ARNG. In support of his appeal, he submits a copies of his Certificate of Release or Discharge (DD Form 214); copies of certificates of awards that he received while he was in the Army; a copy of his honorable discharge certificate; copies of certificates for courses that he successfully completed while he was in the Army; a copy of the nomination and the certificate that he received for being selected the employee of the year; a copy of a certificate that he received for being selected employee of the month; a copy of a letter that he received from the National Guard Bureau, responding to a letter he wrote to the President dated 23 May 2002, instructing him to apply to this Board if he is unable to join the California Army National Guard; and two letters of appreciation dated 28 December 1998 and 20 August 2002, regarding his outstanding employee performance.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

On 16 August 1974, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-3. He successfully completed his training as a medical corpsman. He remained on active duty during a series of continuous reenlistments.

Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on 24 April 1975, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade and a forfeiture of pay.

On 15 July1975, NJP was imposed against him for sleeping while on guard duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.

On 29 March 1978, NJP was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay.

He had NJP imposed against him on 8 July 1978, for failure to obey a lawful order. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.





On 27 May 1979, NJP was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.

On 17 July 1979, NJP was imposed against the applicant for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 9 May until 11 May 1979; from 19 June until 2 July 1979; from 5 July until 6 July 1979; and from 9 July until 10 July 1979. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.

On 28 November 1979, NJP was imposed against him, for being AWOL from 8 November until 11 November 1979. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay and an oral reprimand.

A review of the available records shows that he had NJP imposed against him again on 10 December 1981, for being AWOL. The specific dates of his absences are unknown, however, his punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.

On 15 December 1989, the United States Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC) notified the applicant that the Calendar Year 1989 Sergeant First Class Selection Board had reviewed his Official Military Personnel File and determined that he was to be issued a Department of the Army (DA) imposed bar to reenlistment under the QMP. The EREC cited his records of NJP from 1976 through 1981 as the basis for the bar to reenlistment.

On 3 April 1990, the applicant submitted an appeal to the bar to reenlistment citing the number of years that had passed since the last record of NJP that he received and the conflict between the records of NJP and his entire record of service. He cited his achievement awards and he stated that he had continually focused on self-improvement by completing his required courses and training. He states that the records of NJP have served their purpose and that they have made him a better person. He concluded by requesting he be retained on active duty because he still had many good years to give to the Army.

On 20 September 1990, the applicant was informed that his appeal to the DA imposed bar to reenlistment was denied. He was informed that he would be honorably discharged and that he would be assigned a RE-4 code.

Accordingly, on 31 December 1990, he was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16-5a, as a result of a DA imposed bar to reenlistment. He had completed approximately 16 years, 10 months and 14 days of total active service and he was furnished an RE-3 code.

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.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by changes in service obligations. Paragraph 16-5 applies to personnel denied reenlistment and provides that soldiers who receive DA imposed or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they will be unable to overcome the bar may apply for immediate discharge. Paragraph 16-8 provides that personnel will be notified of the separation by appropriate commanders and be provided the basis for the separation.

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 Board has noted the applicant’s contentions. However, he was properly informed that he was being discharged under the QMP and that he was being assigned an RE-4 code in accordance with the applicable regulation. Nonetheless, an error was made during the preparation of the applicant’s DD Form 214, which resulted in his being assigned an RE-3 code instead of an RE-4 code.

3. This Board concludes that there is no basis for removal of those disqualifications on which the code was based and the applicant’s contentions do not demonstrate error or injustice in the disposition of his case by his separation from the service.





4. 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

__fe ____ __gw____ __au____ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003089455
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2003/11/04
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 1021	100.0000
2. 4	100.0300
3. 7	100.0600
4.
5.
6.