RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 11 January 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004106084
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. Rosa M. Chandler | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Ms. Linda D. Simmons | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. John T. Meixell | |Member |
| |Ms. 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 under other than honorable
conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge or an
honorable discharge and that his reentry (RE) code of RE-4 be changed
accordingly.
2. The applicant states, in effect that his parents were going through a
divorce; his mother lost her job and experienced financial difficulties.
His mother told him that she needed him at home. Therefore, he completed
basic training and went home and failed to return to his unit. He returned
to military control at Fort Knox, Kentucky when he learned he was being
carried in an absent without leave (AWOL) status. He was processed out of
the military without understanding his reentry status.
3. The applicant provides in support of his request:
a. A statement written in his own behalf dated 8 March 2004 in which
he indicates his family was experiencing personal and financial problems
and his drill sergeants verbally gave him permission to go home and take
care of them. He desires a second chance to serve his country.
b. A letter written by the Station Commander, United States Army
Recruiting Station, Auburn, New York, dated 18 March 2004, expressing the
applicant's desire to return to military service.
c. A letter from the Chief, Policy and Eligibility Inquiries Branch,
United States Army Human Resources Command, Alexandria, Virginia, dated
12 November 2003, which denies the applicant's request to change his RE
code.
d. DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,
issued on 19 June 2002.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. On 19 May 2001, the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve Delayed
Entry Program (DEP) for 8 years. On 1 June 2001, he was discharged from
the DEP and enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and: training in an
infantry military occupational specialty (MOS) to be identified during
basic training in accordance with the needs of the Army; station of choice
(Fort Drum, New York); and a cash bonus.
2. On 25 August 2001, the applicant left his unit at Fort Benning, Georgia
in an AWOL status and he remained AWOL until he returned to military
control at the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Knox, on 9 May 2002.
3. On 17 May 2002, court-martial charges were preferred against the
applicant for the above period of AWOL.
4. On 17 May 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and
requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-
200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He
authenticated a statement with his signature acknowledging that he
understood the ramifications and effects of receiving a UOTHC discharge.
He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.
5. On 31 May 2002, the approval authority approved the applicant's request
for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200
and directed that he be separated with a UOTHC discharge.
6. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that on 19 June 2002, he was
separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 with
a UOTHC discharge in lieu of trial by a court-martial. He had completed 4
months and
1 day of active military service and he had 257 days of lost time due to
being AWOL. His DD Form 214, shows a separation code of "KFS" and an RE
Code of RE-4.
7. 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.
8. 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 discharge for the good of the service 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 considered appropriate.
9. 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. AR 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.
10. An RE code of RE-4 and a Separation Code of "KFS" apply 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 AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant voluntarily requested an administrative separation under
the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 to avoid trial by
court-martial. There is no indication that the request was made under
coercion or duress.
2. The evidence available supports the characterization of service, the
separation code of "KFS" and the assigned RE Code of RE-4.
3. 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__lds___ __jtm___ __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.
Linda D. Simmons
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR2004106084 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20050111 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |(UOTHC) |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |20020619 |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR635-200, Chap 10 |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |(DENY) |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. |112.0000 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040007878C070208
The applicant requests that his reentry code of “4” on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed. The applicant was discharged on 30 October 2001. 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 | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015713
On 25 June 2003, the applicant was discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. The SPD code of KFS 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 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes RE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017309
The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant upon his discharge shows he was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), in lieu of trial by court-martial. It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code KFS is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. The record shows that after...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100351C070208
Richard Dunbar | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 28 August 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request of an upgrade of his discharge. He was AWOL for 115 days and when he submitted his request for discharge, he indicated that he had no desire to perform further military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013944C071029
Dale E. DeBruler | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's record contains a Deserter/Absentee Wanted by the Armed Forces (DD Form 553), which shows the applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 26 January 2004. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017031
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code KFS is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Absent any evidence of error or injustice in the discharge process, the assigned RE-4 code was proper and equitable based on the authority and reason for his discharge, and it remains valid.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130022426
On 12 February 2003, a memorandum from the Staff Judge Advocate indicated the applicant's chain of command after reviewing his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for two specification of AWOL and based on no prior convictions recommended the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. On 12 February 2003, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004225C070206
Leonard G. Hassell | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 22 Febraury 2002, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009417C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. In his request the applicant stated he understood he could request discharge for the good of the service because charges had been filed against him under the UCMJ, which could authorize the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012977
He states: * he needs these codes changed so he can enlist in the Army * his discharge was upgraded from under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to uncharacterized * his wife was very ill with lupus at the time and she was unable to care for herself and their children 3. Army Regulation 635-200 states that individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge prior to discharge or release from active duty. The applicant's request that his RE...