IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  13 November 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080015090 


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, in effect, reconsideration of her earlier petition requesting an upgrade of her reentry eligibility (RE) code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there were other Soldiers in training that were much worse than her but received better RE codes.  She describes her views of the poor performance and misconduct of these other Soldiers and questions how she could have received an RE-3 code and been removed from the Army for no good reason.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored letter with new argument in support of her reconsideration request.

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 AR20080006420 on 10 July 2008.

2.  The applicant’s record shows that she enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 3 January 2007.

3.  On 22 June 2007, while the applicant was attending advanced individual training at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, her unit commander notified her of his intent to initiate action to separate her under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), by entry-level status (ELS) performance and conduct.  The unit commander cited the applicant's clear demonstration that she could not or would not adapt socially or emotionally to military life and would be a detriment to her future military unit.

4.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation action notification and consulted with legal counsel who advised her of the basis for the contemplated separation action, its effects, the rights available to her, and the effect of a waiver of those rights.  The applicant acknowledged that she understood she would be ineligible to apply for enlistment in the United States Army for a period of 2 years after discharge.  

5.  On 25 June 2007, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation and directed she be discharged under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200, and that she be issued an ELS discharge.  On 29 June 2007, the applicant was discharged accordingly.

6.  The separation document (DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant at the time of her separation confirms that based on the authority and reason for her discharge, her character of service was described as "Uncharacterized" and she was assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of JGA and an RE code of 3.

7.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the 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-3 applies to persons who have a waivable disqualification. 

8.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (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.  It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code JGA is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of entry-level performance and conduct.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table indicates that RE-3 is the proper code to assign members separated with an SPD code of JGA.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request that her RE-3 code be upgraded because it was unjust given the chain of command ignored the performance and conduct of other Soldiers was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support her claim.  Each case brought before the Board is considered on its own merits.  The performance and conduct of other Soldiers not party to the application being reviewed is not subject to the Board’s review.  They are not considered mitigating factors in her case, nor can they be used to excuse her documented poor ELS performance and conduct.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The record also confirms that based on the authority and reason for her discharge, the applicant was appropriately assigned an SPD code of JGA and an RE code of 3 in accordance with the applicable regulation.  Absent any evidence of error or injustice related to her separation processing, the RE-3 code she was assigned was and remains valid.

3.  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 this requirement or that would support amendment of the original Board decision in this case.

4.  The applicant is advised that although no change to her RE code is being recommended, she still has an opportunity to enlist after 2 years have passed since her discharge.  RE-3 applies to persons who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service; however, a waiver of the disqualification is allowed.  Therefore, if she desires to enlist, she should contact a local recruiter to determine her eligibility.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time and are required to process waivers of RE codes.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____  ___x____  ____x___  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 AR20080006420, dated 10 July 2008.



      __________x_______________
                 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)                                         AR20080015090



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080015090



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1