RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  8 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010601 


	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. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Ms. Anita McKim-Spilker

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. William F. Crain

Chairperson

Mr. Edward E. Montgomery

Member

Ms. Rea M. Nuppenau

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 of RE-4 be changed to allow reenlistment in the Army.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgraded his discharge to "Uncharacterized" and he has been working with Army and Marine Corps recruiters training recruits for basic training at the small fitness and aerobic center that he owns.  He states that he made a mistake and he would like to go back and change the worse decision of his life.  He is married, has two stepdaughters, and owns his own business.  He is a member of the Volunteer Fire Department, and he also works with the ROTC Department at the local high school.  He made immature choices in the past and now would like a second chance. 

3.  The applicant provides 10 letters of reference.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted on 7 May 2002 in the Regular Army for a period of three years.  On 25 October 2004, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial after being charged with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 12 May 2002 through 10 July 2004 (790 days).  The applicant was apprehended.

2.  He was credited with 3 months and 9 days of active duty service.  In reality, he was present for duty for only 22 days of his three year enlistment; 95 days of the credited active duty were in an excess leave status.  His service was initially characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  He was assigned a separation designator code (SPD) of "KFS" and an RE code of RE-4.

3.  On 6 March 2006, the applicant appeared before the ADRB Travel Board in Dallas, Texas.  After considering his testimony, the ADRB changed the applicant's characterization of service to "uncharacterized," indicating that the characterization of service was too harsh based on post-service accomplishments and circumstances surrounding the AWOL.  The circumstances surrounding the AWOL were not explained and the transcript of the hearing was not available to the ABCMR.  The ADRB denied the applicant's request to change his narrative reason for discharge or his RE code.


4.  The applicant provided multiple character references from members of his community indicating that he has contributed many hours to the development of community programs and has been a proven leader in community projects.  He is training as a fireman and is a member of the Volunteer Fire Department.  He owns a gym, is responsible, trains prospective military recruits, is patriotic, possesses moral integrity and is self-disciplined. 

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter l0 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 a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The requests may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

6.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies and procedures for enlistment and processing into the RA and the U.S. 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 1 and 
2 permit immediate reenlistment if all other criteria are met.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  An RE code of 4 indicates separation from the last period of service with a disqualification which cannot be waived and ineligibility for reenlistment.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (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. Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), AR 635-5-1 (Separation Documents) establishes RE Codes to be assigned for each SPD.  

8.  A separation code of "KFS" applies to persons who are separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that an RE code of 4 is the applicable RE code assigned for individuals separated by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial.  An RE code of 4 indicates that the applicant was separated from his last period of service with a disqualification which cannot be waived and he is ineligible for reenlistment.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant voluntarily requested separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser- included offenses under the UCMJ.   

2.  The applicant's discharge was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable records.  There is no evidence of procedural errors that jeopardized his rights. 

3.  Although the ADRB changed the applicant's characterization of service to "uncharacterized," it found no basis upon which to change his narrative reason for discharge.  The applicant's RE code is based on his reason for discharge and cannot be changed unless the applicant's narrative reason for discharge is changed.  In this case, the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to mitigate 790 days of AWOL and apprehension.  Therefore, the Board finds no basis upon which to change the applicant's narrative reason for discharge and there is no justification for a change in his RE code.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit any evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__wfc___  __eem___  __rmn___  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.




						William F. Crain
______________________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060010601
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20070308
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
100.0300
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.