RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  8 April 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080000020 


	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.  




Director



Analyst

      The following members, a quorum, were present:




Chairperson



Member



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 that his Reentry (RE) code of RE-4 be changed to 
RE-3 so that he can reenter the U.S. Army.

2.  The applicant states that his RE code should be reduced to RE-3 because his former commanding officer wrote him a letter of recommendation.  He states that he has kept out of trouble and has excelled in the community college.  He also states that if he was allowed to reenter the U.S. Army, he would be able to prove that he could be a good Soldier.  He believes that other Soldiers who have failed urine tests and who have similar charges received lesser punishments.  He wants to serve the Army to the best of his ability for as long as he is able.  

3.  The applicant provides a letter of recommendation, dated 23 January 2006, from his former commanding officer and a letter to his congressman.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s complete military records are not available.  This case is being considered primarily using the applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 June 2004.  He completed infantry training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11C (indirect fire infantryman).

3.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows two periods of lost time under Title 10, United States Code 972, from 7 November 2005 to 8 November 2005 and from 10 November 2005 to 19 January 2006.

4.  The applicant's discharge packet is not available.  However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 23 January 2006 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court-martial with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) .  He completed 1 year, 4 months, and 20 days of active military service with 71 days of lost time.  He was discharged with a separation code of "KFS" (For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial) and issued a RE code of RE-4.

5.  The applicant provided a letter of recommendation from his former commanding officer at the Old Guard in Fort Myer, Virginia.  His former commanding officer stated that he was responsible for the actions taken against the applicant which led to his discharge from the Army.  He stated that he had observed the applicant during the period his case of misconduct was being processed.  He also stated the applicant has learned from his actions and he has matured as part of the process.  He indicated that the applicant had the potential to serve with distinction as a Soldier.  The former commanding officer further stated that he originally recommended a general under honorable conditions discharge but his recommendation was not accepted by his superiors.  

6.  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.  

7.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the separation program designator “KFS” as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as “For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial” and that the authority for discharge under this separation program designator is “AR 635-200, Chapter 10.” 

8.  Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect, at the time, established RE code 4 as the proper reentry code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10 for the good of the service.

9.  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 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.

10.  RE code 4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is not waivable.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In the absence of the applicant's chapter 10 discharge proceedings, the applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, is presumed to have been administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  

2.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a separation code of “KFS” (For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial) and was assigned a RE code of “4” in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time.

3.  The RE code of "4" issued to the applicant is not waivable and does not allow him to continue Army service under regulations applicable to the Regular Army and USAR.  The applicant might consider contacting the Army National Guard to determine his eligibility to enlist in that Reserve component.  

4.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  However, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the reentry code issued to him was administratively incorrect, in error or unjust.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

LS______  DH______  EM______  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.



                           LS  _____
                CHAIRPERSON
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080000020


4


DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET, 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA  22202-4508