RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        15 September 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040011558


      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             |
|     |Mr. John J. Wendland, Jr.         |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John Slone                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      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, that his Reentry (RE) Code be
changed.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there is nothing in his service
records that reflects anything but the highest standards during his ten
years of service and that it is an injustice for him to have been issued
the wrong RE Code.  He also states that he was denied enlistment in the
U.S. Air Force because of the erroneous RE Code.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty), with an effective date of 2 April
2004.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records show that he initially enlisted in the U.S.
Army Reserve on 14 January 1985.  He entered active duty in the Regular
Army (RA) on 15 February 1985 for a period of 4 years, reenlisted for 4
years, and was released from active duty with an Honorable discharge on 21
July 1992.  The applicant subsequently enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve,
on 4 December 1992, in the rank of sergeant/pay grade E-5, was promoted to
the rank of staff sergeant/pay grade E-6, and continued to serve until 2
April 2001.

2.  On 3 April 2001, the applicant enlisted for a period of 3 years in the
RA, in the rank of sergeant/pay grade E-5.  On 1 December 2001, he was
promoted to the rank of staff sergeant/pay grade E-6.  He continued to
serve in the RA until
2 April 2004, when he was discharged with an Honorable discharge.  At the
time of his discharge the applicant had completed 10 years, 5 months, and 7
days total active service; and 8 years, 9 months, and 12 days total
inactive service.

3.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant upon his discharge from the RA
shows the separation authority was chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, and
the reason for his separation was completion of required active service.
Based on the authority and reason for his separation, the applicant was
assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of KBK and an RE code
of RE-3.






4.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities
(regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active
duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies
the SPD code of KBK as the appropriate code to assign RA enlisted Soldiers
who are voluntarily discharged under the provisions of chapter 4, Army
Regulation 635-200, based upon completion of required active service.

5.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment
Program) provides, in pertinent part, 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.  RE-3 applies to persons who
are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the
time of separation, but the disqualification is waivable.

6.  Army Regulation 601-210 further provides, in pertinent part, that RE
codes are used for administrative purposes only, and that applicants should
be advised that RE codes are not to be considered derogatory in nature,
they simply are codes used for identification of an enlistment processing
procedure.  This document also provides procedures for the verification of
an applicant's prior service.  (Applicants who are former members of the
Armed Forces are categorized as prior service personnel.  The applicant's
military records show that he qualifies as prior service.)  It states, in
pertinent part, that, "Applicants who are thought to have had, or who claim
to have had, prior service in any U.S. Armed Force will not be enlisted in
the RA or USAR until their prior service, if any, is verified".

7.  The governing Army regulation further provides that, prior service Army
personnel will be advised that RE codes may be changed only if they are
determined to be administratively incorrect.  Applicants who have correct
RE codes will be processed for a waiver at their request if otherwise
qualified and waiver is authorized.  No requirement exists to change an RE
code to qualify for enlistment.  Only when there is evidence to support an
incorrect RE code or when there is an administrative error will an
applicant be advised to request a correction".  This document provides,
"Request for a waiver action will automatically trigger an RE code review.
Otherwise, when it appears that the RE code is incorrect, an applicant may
request correction by sending a written explanation, DD Form 214, and
evidence to support the claim to Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources
Command, Enlisted Personnel Management Division, 2461 Eisenhower Avenue,
Alexandria, Virginia  22331-0451.

8.  There is no evidence in the applicant's record which shows that he
applied for a waiver of his RE Code to enter the U.S. Air Force and/or that
his request was denied.

9.  There is no evidence in the applicant's record which shows that he
submitted a request for correction of his RE Code to the Commander, U.S.
Army Human Resources Command.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request for change to the RE-3 code he received in
conjunction with his discharge from the RA and the supporting evidence he
provided were carefully considered.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s RA separation
processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.
All requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the
applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  As a
result, his separation was proper and equitable, and the RE-3 code he
received was appropriately assigned based on the authority and reason for
his separation.  As a result, the RE-3 code assigned was and remains valid.

3.  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.

4.  The applicant is advised that, although no change is being recommended
to his RE Code, this does not mean that he is disqualified from reentry
into the RA or enlistment in the U.S. Air Force, as the RE-3 code he was
assigned is waivable.  If the applicant still desires to enlist in the U.S.
Air Force, he should contact a local recruiter to determine his eligibility
and/or request assistance in processing a waiver through appropriate
administrative channels to enter the U.S. Air Force.  Those individuals can
best advise a prior service member as to the needs of the U.S. Air Force
and are required to process waivers of RE codes.

5.  The applicant is further advised that, if he has evidence to support
that an administrative error was made or incorrect RE code was assigned, he
may request a correction by sending a written explanation, his DD Form 214,
and evidence to support the claim to Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources
Command, Enlisted Personnel Management Division, 2461 Eisenhower Avenue,
Alexandria, Virginia  22331-0451.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JS___  __ENA__  __CAK __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.





                                  _______John Slone_________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040011558                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050915                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |20040402                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, Chapter 4                   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Completion of Required Active Service   |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.0300.0000                           |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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