IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        09 SEPTEMBER 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080008060 


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 reconsideration of her previous request that her reentry eligibility (RE) code be changed from a code of RE-4 to a RE-3.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she believes her RE code is unjust because during her 10 days of unauthorized absence she was under the care of a doctor at the Fort Bragg wounded Soldier clinic for mental health issues.  She states that a doctor found that she was unfit to be transferred back to the Iraq war zone and/or with the same command.  She states that her doctor used her profound knowledge to try to seek help in getting her removed from her unit’s hostile environment and transferred to a more stable place where she could get help for her mental issues.  She states that her issues were due to her unit’s violent threats and gestures; and the “unit’s head” tried to quiet the situation that evolved within the unit.  She states that orders were published despite what the doctors instructed; that she was sent back to Iraq to the same unit where she faced a great deal of endangerment for even mentioning the things that were occurring within the unit; and that she was being abused by being told to leave because there was someone else already filling the position to which she was assigned.  

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was harassed and threatened until she decided to take matters into her own hands.  She states that she was an “achieving Soldier” going, above and beyond; and that she was trapped between “a snare and a hard place.”  The applicant concludes by stating that the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed her case and found her discharge under other than honorable conditions to be harsh.  She states that the ADRB upgraded her discharge to under honorable conditions (general); therefore, she hopes that this Board will be able to see through the injustice and make the correct decision.

4.  The applicant provides in support of her application, a copy of a letter from this agency dated 28 April 2008, informing her of the receipt of her application; an undated, self authored, statement explaining the events that she contends occurred, which led to her discharge; and copies of her health records dated 30 August 2005, 5 August 2005, 26 July 2005, 19 July 2005, 11 July 2005, 8 July 2005, 7 July 2005, and 28 June 2005.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20070013461, on 31 January 2008.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 13 November 1999, for 8 years, in pay grade E-2.  On 12 July 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 4 years, in the pay grade of E-2.  She successfully completed her training as an automated logistical specialist.

3.  After completing 1 year and 11months of net active service, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 11 June 2002, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-8, due to parenthood and she was transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) to complete her Reserve obligation.

4.  Permanent Orders 336-001 was published on 1 December 2004, deploying the applicant’s unit in support of Contingency Operation Iraqi Freedom and Return, effective 3 December 2004.

5.  The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 17 September 2005 and she remained absent in a desertion status until she surrendered to military authorities on 2 November 2005.

6.  On 7 November 2005, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against her for being AWOL from 17 September 2005 until 2 November 2005.  She acknowledged receipt of the notification and, after consulting with counsel, she submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 19 January 2006 and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

8.  Accordingly, on 8 February 2006, the applicant was discharged, under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court martial.  She was furnished an RE code of RE-4 and a separation code of KFS.

9.  On 3 August 2006, the applicant petitioned the ADRB requesting an upgrade of her discharge, a change of her reason for discharge and a change of her RE code of RE-4.  On 1 August 2007, the ADRB granted partial relief in her case by upgrading her discharge to general.  However, the ADRB determined that her reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and the applicant was informed her RE code could not be waived and that she is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 

10.  On 7 September 2007, the applicant petitioned this Board requesting that her RE code be upgraded.  On 31 January 2008, the Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his RE-4 code.

11.  The health records that the applicant now submits in support of her application are dated between 28 June 2005 and 30 August 2005.  Her health records list her illnesses and reflect the treatment that she received from Womack Army Medical Center between these dates.  Her records show that, among other illness, she was suffering from social environment problems, a delusional (paranoid) disorder, and relational problems.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for the preparation of the Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).  It provides, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 will be prepared to reflect an individual's service as it exists on the date of REFRAD or discharge.

13.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 prescribes the specific reasons for separating soldiers from active duty and the separation codes to be entered on DD Form 214.  It provides that when a soldier’s narrative reason for separation is in lieu to trial by court-martial, the separation code KFS will be entered in block 26 of the DD Form 214.  The Separation Program Designator Code and RE Code 
Cross-Reference Table shows that when a Soldier’s is assigned a KFS separation code, he/she was be assigned an RE-4 code.

14.  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 RA 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, including RA RE codes.  

15.  Army Regulation 601-210 provides the guidance for the issuance of RE codes upon separation from active duty.  It states, in pertinent part, that these codes are not to be considered derogatory in nature; they are simply codes that are used for identification of an enlistment processing procedure.

16.  An RE code of RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service by virtue of being separated from the service, in most instances, with a nonwaivable disqualification.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  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 has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The Board has noted the applicant’s contentions.  However, according to her records, she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial, which means that she was not qualified for continued service at the time of her discharge.  

3.  While the applicant’s health records and mental conditions have been noted, neither is a sufficient basis for changing the RE code that she was furnished at the time of her discharge, which properly coincides with her reason for separation.  

4.  She was furnished an RE code to reflect her eligibility for reenlistment at the time of his discharge.  She was discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial and she was appropriately furnished an RE-4 code.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.







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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20070013461, dated 31 January 2008.




      ___        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)                                         AR20080008060



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080008060



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1