IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  01 July 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080006582 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his REENTRY (RE) Code be changed from a “4” to a “3” or to a more favorable code. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there really is no error or injustice in his record because he went absent without leave (AWOL) and he regrets ever doing so and now just wants to fix it.  He goes on to state that he went to Fort Sill, Oklahoma to finish his advanced individual training (AIT) and his girlfriend was pregnant at the time and ended up having a miscarriage.  He continues by stating that when she called him he just left and he has regretted it every day since that time.  He further states that he desires a second chance to correct his mistake and contends that he will not take it for granted and will do his very best to do right.  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant initially enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 24 February 2006 for a period of 8 years, training as an ammunition specialist, a $7,000 non-prior service enlistment bonus and the Montgomery GI Bill Kicker.   

2.  On 1 August 2007, he enlisted in the Regular Army in the pay grade of E-3 for a period of 3 years and 8 weeks and training as a cannon crewman.  He was transferred to Fort Sill, Oklahoma to undergo his training.  

3.  On 16 August 2007, he went AWOL and remained absent in a deserter status until he was apprehended by civilian authorities in Huntington, West Virginia on 12 January 2008 and was returned to military control at Fort Knox, Kentucky, where charges were preferred against him on 24 January 2008 for being AWOL from 16 August 2007 to 12 January 2008.    

4.  After consulting with defense counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request he indicated that he understood the charges that had been preferred against him, that he was making the request of his own free will, without coercion from anyone and that he was aware of the implications attached to his request.  He also admitted that he was guilty of the charges against him or of lesser included offenses which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He acknowledged that he understood that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of all benefits as a result of such a discharge.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.   

5.  The appropriate authority approved his request on 20 February 2008 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.

6.  Accordingly, he was discharged on 7 March 2008, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He had served 2 months and 11 days of active service during his current enlistment and 5 months of total active service.  He had approximately 145 days of lost time due to AWOL.

7.  There is no indication in the available records to show that he has applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the 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 at any time after charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge they might receive.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
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 processing into the Regular Army and the USAR.  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-4 indicates that a person is not qualified for continued Army service by virtue of being separated from the service with a nonwaivable disqualification.  The applicable regulations direct that an RE Code of “4” be issued for an SPD of “KFS,” which indicates separation for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.
 
 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was issued an RE Code of “4” based on the narrative reason for his discharge, which was based on his approved request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted and the evidence of record that his RE Code is incorrect or that there is sufficient reason to warrant a change of his RE Code.  

2.  The applicant’s contention that he made a mistake at the time and now wants a second chance has been noted and found to lack merit.  The applicant had an opportunity to present a statement in his own behalf to explain any mitigating circumstances that may have caused him to go AWOL and chose not to do so. 

3.  It is also noted that at the time, the applicant did not surrender to authorities and was apprehended by civil authorities, which is indicative of his intent not to return.  While he may regret the decisions that he made at that time, it does not change the character of his service at the time and does not serve as a sufficient basis to change his RE Code to a more favorable code that would allow him to enlist again.

4.  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 the aforementioned requirement.    







BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__XXX __  __XXX__  __XXX__   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.




      ___        XXX                ___
                CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080006582





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080006582



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1