Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010032
Original file (20100010032.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  7 October 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100010032 


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 eligibility (RE) code 4 be changed to RE-3.

2.  The applicant states he was granted an upgrade to a general discharge and would like to enlist in the military.  He states that upon grant of his RE code change, he will enlist in the U.S. Navy.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's military personnel records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 February 2002 for a period of 3 years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty of 31F (Fire Support Specialist).  He immediately reenlisted on 7 February 2004 for a period of 6 years.

3.  The applicant served in Iraq from 21 October 2003 to 7 February 2004 and from 8 December 2004 to 15 March 2005.

4.  On 2 August 2005, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for:

* being derelict in the performance of his duties by filling his specimen bottle with water during a urinalysis
* wrongfully using cocaine

5.  On 12 August 2005, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service.  On 16 August 2005, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and directed his service be characterized as under other than honorable conditions.

6.  On 16 September 2005, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of KFS and an RE code of 4.  He had completed 3 years, 7 months, and 11 days of active service that was characterized as under other than honorable conditions.

7.  On 8 April 2009, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge and determined that his discharge was properly issued, but the characterization of service was too harsh.  The ADRB granted a change of characterization to under honorable conditions.  However, the ADRB determined that the reason for discharge and the RE code were both proper and equitable.

8.  References:

	a.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator 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 SPD's that were to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation showed that the SPD code KFS as shown on the applicant's DD Form 214 specified the narrative reason for discharge as in lieu of trial by court-martial.
	b.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), then in effect, provided eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army and the U.S. Army Reserve.  Table 3-1 stated that an RE-4 applied to individuals separated from their last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification.

	c.  The SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table in effect at the time showed that the appropriate RE code for SPD code KFS was RE-4.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was discharged on 16 September 2005 under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200.  The applicant was assigned an SPD code KFS and an RE code 4.

2.  The applicant was granted a change in the characterization of his discharge by the ADRB.  However, the reason for separation remains appropriate due to the fact the applicant requested to be discharged in lieu of a trial by court-martial. Therefore, the SPD code KFS is correct.

3.  The SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table shows that for the SPD code KFS, an RE code 4 is assigned.  Therefore, the applicant's RE code is correct.

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 that requirement.

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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ____________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)                                         AR20100010032



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100010032



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | AR20080017717

    Original file (AR20080017717.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It provides 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 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designated Codes), Table 2-3, states that the SPD code KFS denotes discharge for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial. Since the applicant was properly discharged, there is no reason to change a correctly assigned RE code.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007221

    Original file (20080007221.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was upgraded to a discharge under honorable conditions by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). Counsel provides no additional evidence or official documentation in support of the applicant's application. Paragraph 3-27 (Correction of Army RE codes) of Army Regulation 601-210, then in effect, provided that RE codes may be changed only if they are determined to be administratively incorrect.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005387

    Original file (20080005387.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant contends that her RE code should be changed so that she can enlist in the military. Evidence of record shows she was separated from the military by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial. Although the ADRB granted partial relief in the applicant's request for a discharge upgrade and since the reason for her discharge was proper and equitable, in accordance with the provisions Army Regulation 635-5-1 the applicant was properly assigned an RE code of 4 based on the reason...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004731

    Original file (20080004731.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that his code of RE-4 was too harsh; therefore, he would like it upgraded to at least a code of RE-3. On 10 January 2006, the approving authority approved the applicant's request and directed the applicant be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), Chapter 10, and his service be characterized as Under Other Than Honorable conditions. _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011629

    Original file (20080011629.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He continued by stating that he received a letter from the ADRB which stated that his discharge had been upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge, but that his RE code would remain at 4, which prevents him from being able to do what he wants to do most, which is to reenter the Army. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that an RE code of 4 is the applicable RE code assigned for individuals separated in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, it does not change...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007678

    Original file (20120007678.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 May 2005, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, with a UOTHC discharge. On 25 May 2005, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued at the time shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph Chapter 10, “In lieu of Trial by Court-Martial,”...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003198C070205

    Original file (20060003198C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070003785C071029

    Original file (20070003785C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Rowland C. Heflin | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The separation document he was issued confirms he was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, and that he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KFS and an RE-4 code based on this authority and reason for separation. Notwithstanding the ADRB decision to upgrade the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015546

    Original file (20080015546.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military personnel record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 April 1997. On 3 May 2000, the approval authority approved the applicant's request and directed the applicant be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, and his service be characterized as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. On 4 February 2005, the ADRB reviewed the applicant's record and determined that his discharge was inequitable and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009562

    Original file (20110009562.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 20 October 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110009562 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his record to show reentry (RE) code 3. The evidence of record does not show, nor has he provided evidence showing error in the RE code he was assigned.