RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        01 MARCH 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040004387


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Walter Morrison               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Duecaster              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Antonio Uribe                 |     |Member               |

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier
request to have his RE (Reentry) Code changed from RE-3 to RE-1 and to have
his SPD (Separation Program Designator) Code changed from KGH to MBK.

2.  In addition to requesting reconsideration of his request to change his
RE and SPD Codes, he is now also requesting that his separation authority
be changed from AR (Army Regulation) 635-200, paragraph 16-5b to AR 635-
200, chapter 4. He also requests that the middle initial of his relative,
recorded in item 19b (nearest relative) be corrected from “K” to “L.”

3.  The applicant states that he is attempting to return to active duty and
that the original Board did not review his complete application and record.
 He states that when he received orders on 25 September 1995 they were for
“EST not PCS.”

4.  The applicant provides copies of his January 1995 request for
reenlistment, a copy of his March 1995 reenlistment contract, and a copy of
the orders that assigned him to the United States Army Transition Point at
Fort Lewis, Washington for “transition processing.”  The orders are dated
25 September 1995.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR20000043282 on 6 March 2001.

2.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered
military service as a member of the United States Army Reserve in January
1984 and was subsequently promoted to pay grade E-4.  He did serve a period
of active duty in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm.

3.  In September 1992, while still a member of the United States Army
Reserve, the applicant requested enlistment in the Regular Army.  On 3
November 1992 he executed a 3-year enlistment contract and entered active
duty in pay grade
E-4.

4.  As noted in the Board’s original proceedings, the applicant executed a
4-year reenlistment contract on 6 March 1995.  As a result of that
reenlistment action, his scheduled separation date (ETS) would have been
established as 5 March 1999.

5.  Subsequent to his March 1995 reenlistment action, the applicant was
discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-
5b, and received an RE Code of “3” and an SPD Code of “KGH.”  Orders
published on 25 September 1995 reassigned the applicant from his infantry
unit at Fort Lewis to the Transition Point for “transition processing.”
The orders indicated that after processing “you are discharged from the
Component shown.”  The orders indicate that the applicant was honorably
discharged from the Regular Army on 15 October 1995.

6.  His separation document indicates that he was separated in pay grade E-
3, with a date of rank of 16 June 1995.

7.  Item 19b, on the applicant’s separation document, lists “Evelyn K.” as
his nearest relative.  “Evelyn” is the applicant’s mother and both his
enlistment documents and his record of emergency data indicate that
Evelyn’s middle initial is “L” and not “K” as recorded on his separation
document.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16.5b provides for the voluntary
separation of Soldiers who perceive that they will be unable to overcome a
locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  Such Soldiers are permitted to
request separation immediately.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, provides for the separation of
Soldiers upon the expiration of the enlistment/reenlistment contract or
fulfillment of their service obligation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence does confirm that the middle initial for his nearest
relative, as recorded in item 19b on his 1995 separation document is
incorrect.  The middle initial should be “L” as the applicant states, and
not “K.”  The entry should be corrected accordingly.

2.  It is unclear what the applicant meant when he stated in his current
application that when he received his 25 September 1995 orders that they
were for “EST not PCS.”  The orders confirm that the applicant was being
reassigned to the Transition Point for transition processing and that he
was to be discharged upon completion of processing.  The orders offer no
evidence that the applicant was being discharged upon completion of his
enlistment/reenlistment contract or that the reason for his separation,
“non-retention on active duty,” was incorrect.

3.  The applicant may have reenlisted in March 1995, however, the
information available to the Board indicates that subsequent to his
reenlistment action he was reduced from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-3 in
June 1995.  It is probable that the reduction action was the basis for a
local bar to reenlistment, which then prompted the applicant to request
separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-
5b.

4.  The applicant’s March 1995 4-year reenlistment contract would not have
expired until March 1999.  The applicant did not complete that reenlistment
contract and hence could not have been separated under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, as he contends.

5.  The applicant’s separation authority, his RE Code and his SPD Code are
all correct and the applicant has not provided any evidence which indicates
an error or injustice occurred or that there is a basis for changing the
information as currently recorded.  The fact that the applicant may be
unable to return to military service is not a basis to change correctly
assigned RE and SPD Codes.

6.  Contrary to the applicant’s contention, the evidence indicates that
both his original application and his records were thoroughly reviewed and
considered during the Board’s original deliberations.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___WM _  ___RD __  ___AU __  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by changing the middle initial in item 19b on his
1995 separation document to “L” vice “K.”
2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant the requested relief pertaining to the authority
for his separation and determined that the overall merits of this case are
insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in
Docket Number AR2000043282, dated 6 March 2001.




                                  _____Walter Morrison________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040004387                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050301                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |PARTIAL GRANT                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]