IN THE CASE OF:	  .

		BOARD DATE:	        10 February 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080018052 


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, that her reentry eligibility (RE) code of RE-4 be changed.

2.  The applicant states that her discharge was recently upgraded and she would like to return to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) to continue to serve her country.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of her request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant served an initial period of active duty between 1983 and 1986, attaining the rank of specialist (E-4).  She was released from active duty at the expiration of her term of service with an honorable characterization of service.

2.  In October 1996 the applicant returned to active duty but was subsequently discharged on 23 September 2000 under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 9 (Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure).  Her service was characterized as honorable.

3.  According to orders contained in the applicant’s official military personnel file, she was voluntarily transferred from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to a troop program unit in 2002.  In April 2005 she was ordered to active duty with her unit in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.  She served in Kuwait between April and December 2005 and on 20 January 2006 was released from active duty at the completion of her required active service.  Her service was once again characterized as honorable.

4.  On 8 December 2006 the applicant was ordered to active duty with her Reserve Component unit in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.  She was serving in the rank of specialist (E4).  In March 2007, while at Fort Bliss, Texas, the applicant was counseled for being AWOL (absent without leave), failing to obey an order from her senior noncommissioned officer, missing movement by failing to attend a unit urinalysis, having alcohol in her barracks room, leaving her weapon unsecured in her room, and failing to follow proper protocol.

5.  In May 2007 the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  The examining official found that the applicant met the physical retention standards prescribed in Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness).  The examiner further determined that the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, able to adhere to the right, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in proceedings.

6.  On 12 July 2007 the applicant, in consonance with her plea, was found guilty by a summary court-martial of AWOL between 26 February 2007 and 15 March 2007 and again from 2 April 2007 to 17 May 2007.  Her punishment included reduction to pay grade E-1 and 30 days of confinement.

7.  On 18 July 2007, the applicant's commander notified her that she was initiating action to discharge her under the provisions of Chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of her having committed a serious offense.  The commander advised the applicant she was recommending that she be discharged under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation action, consulted with counsel, and submitted a statement in her own behalf.  

8.  In the applicant’s self-authored statement she apologized for her conduct and for being an embarrassment to the Army.  She stated that two deaths occurred in her family during the time frame she was deployed to Fort Bliss and that while AWOL she was hospitalized due to stress, depression, and excessive drinking.  She stated she was unable to complete training because of medical problems which further depressed her and she unfortunately took it upon herself to try and take matters into her own hands rather than seek the assistance of her command.  She concluded that she had made a mistake and wished she could do things all over again in a totally different manner.

9.  On 27 August 2007, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge by reason of commission of a serious offense, directed the applicant's service be characterized as under other than honorable conditions, and indicated the Soldier’s RE code would be RE-4.

10.  On 13 September 2007, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c, chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200.  Her service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of JKQ, and assigned an RE code of RE-4.  She had completed 5 months and 13 days of active service during this deployment with 8 years, 5 months, and 29 days of prior active service and 7 years, 8 months, and 8 days of prior inactive service.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include the commission of a serious offense.  Paragraph 14-12c(1) notes that an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion may be separated for commission of a serious offense.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes), then in effect, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the SPDs to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation showed that the SPD code "JKQ" as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specified the narrative reason for discharge as "Misconduct (Serious Offense)."
 
13.  The SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table, dated 15 June 2006, shows that the appropriate RE code for the SPD code of JKQ is RE-3.

14.  Paragraph 3-22 (U.S. Army RE Codes) of Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), provides that RE-4 applies to a person separated from his or her last period of service with a non-waivable disqualification while RE-3 applied to persons who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable.  That same regulations states that a waiver may not be submitted until a 24-month waiting period has elapsed since the applicant was separated or discharged from any component of the Armed Forces for a general discharge (under honorable conditions) or misconduct.

15.  Paragraph 3-27 (Correction of Army RE codes) of Army Regulation 601-210 provides that RE codes may be changed only if they are determined to be administratively incorrect.

16.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to upgrade her discharge.  On 1 August 2008, the ADRB reviewed the applicant's request and determined that the applicant's discharge was properly issued but inequitable as to the characterization.  The ADRB noted that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of service to include her combat service and the circumstances surrounding her misconduct.  The ADRB granted a change of characterization to general under honorable conditions.  However, the ADRB also determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted that the reason for discharge remain unchanged.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant was granted a change in the characterization of her discharge by the ADRB, the reason for separation remains appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

2.  Generally, the upgrading of a discharge by the ADRB without a change in the reason for separation does not warrant a change in an individual’s RE code.  However, in this case, although the applicant’s separation authority directed that she receive an RE code of RE-4, the SPD code under which she was separated provided for issuance of an RE-3.  As such, her assigned RE code is administratively incorrect and should be corrected accordingly to reflect RE-3.

BOARD VOTE:

____x____  ___x_____  ____x____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing in item 27 (Reentry Code) of her 2007 separation document the entry RE-3 vice RE-4.



      ___________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)                                         AR20080018052



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080018052



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1