BOARD DATE:	  17 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130018809 


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 his reentry eligibility (RE) code be changed from "3 " to "1."

2.  The applicant states he has learned from his mistake.  He wants his RE code changed to a "1" so he may serve his country. 

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 22 August 2000, he enlisted in the Regular Army.  He immediately reenlisted on 19 March 2004, 19 March 2008, and 31 October 2010.  He deployed to Iraq during the following periods:

* 10 June - 30 September 2003
* 3 January 2005 - 23 January 2006
* 14 January 2007 - 30 March 2008
* 17 December 2009 - 3 December 2010 

2.  On 14 August 2012, his commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b for a pattern of misconduct. 

	a.  The reasons for his proposed action were the applicant having received, during his current enlistment, a:

* field grade Article 15 for leaving his appointed place of duty
* company grade Article 15 for disrespect to a noncommissioned officer

	b.  The commander advised the applicant he was recommending that his service be characterized as honorable.  

3.  The commander advised the applicant of his right to:

* consult with consulting counsel and/or civilian counsel at no expense 	to the Government
* a hearing before an administrative board
* personal appearance before an administrative separation board
* submit statements in his own behalf 
* obtain copies of documents that would be sent to the separation 	authority supporting the proposed separation
* waive any of these rights 
* withdraw any waiver of rights at any time prior to the date the 	discharge authority directs or approves his separation  

4.  On 22 August 2012, after having consulted with appointed counsel, the applicant acknowledged he had been advised by his consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated action to involuntarily separate him.  He indicated he was not submitting statements in his own behalf.  He requested:

* consideration of his case by an administration board
* a personal appearance before an administrative separation board
* consulting counsel and representation by military counsel and/or civilian counsel at no expense to the Government

5.  On 22 August 2012, his commander recommended that he be separated from the Army prior to the expiration of his term of enlistment under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b due to his pattern of misconduct.  

	a.  The applicant had received a field grade Article 15 on 17 April 2012 and a company grade Article 15 on 25 June 2012.

	b.  Corrective training was imposed on 21 March, 4 April, 17 April, and 
25 June 2012.

	c.  Attempts to rehabilitate the applicant had failed and further effort was unlikely to succeed.  The rehabilitative transfer requirement for the applicant was recommended to be waived.

	d.  He had been reduced from sergeant/E-5 to specialist/E-4 on 17 April 2012.

6.  His intermediate commanders recommended his separation from the Army prior to the expiration of his current term of service and that his service be characterized as honorable.

7.  On 6 February 2013, a board of officers met to determine chapter 14 discharge proceedings against the applicant.

	a.  The board found, by a preponderance of the evidence, the applicant showed a pattern of misconduct in accordance with paragraph 14-12b of Army Regulation 635-200.

	b.  The board recommended his separation from the service and that his service be characterized as honorable.  The board also recommended that the discharge be suspended for a period of 120 days and that he be transferred to another unit.

8.  On 13 March 2013, the general court-martial convening authority approved the findings of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant be separated from the Army with an honorable discharge.  He disapproved the recommendation of the board to suspend the discharge and transfer the applicant to another brigade.

9.  On 22 March 2013, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b.  The applicant was assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of "JKA" and assigned an RE code of "3."  He had completed 12 years, 7 months, and 1 day of active service that was characterized as honorable.  

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  

	 a.  Rehabilitation measures are required prior to initiating separation proceedings for misconduct.  However, the rehabilitative transfer requirement may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. 
	 b.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Paragraph 14-12b provides for the discharge of a Soldier due to a pattern of misconduct.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record.  A characterization of honorable may be approved only by the commander exercising general court-martial jurisdiction or higher authority, unless authority is delegated.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the SPD's to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the SPD "JKA" as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specified the narrative reason for discharge as "Pattern of Misconduct."

12.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army and the U.S. Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  Table 3-1 (U.S. Army RE codes) show that: 

* RE code "1" applies to persons completing their term of active service who are considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army
* RE code "3" applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waiverable

13.  The SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table, dated 31 March 2006, shows that the appropriate RE code for the SPD "JKA" is "3."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  He was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with regulations in effect.  The records contain no indication of procedural or other errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  

2.  The applicant was processed for separation for a pattern of misconduct.  Therefore, the SPD code "JKA" is correct.  According to the SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table, the assignment of RE code of 3 for the applicant's SPD code of "JKA" is correct.  Therefore, there is no error in the RE code entered on his DD Form 214.  

3.  The applicant is advised that although his RE-3 code was properly assigned, this does not mean that he is totally disqualified from returning to military service. The disqualification upon which the RE-3 codes were based may be waived for enlistment purposes.  The applicant is advised that if he desires to enlist, he should contact a local recruiter who can best advise him on his eligibility for returning to military service.  These individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the service at the time and are required to process enlistment waivers for the applicant’s RE code.

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)                                         AR20130018809



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130018809



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1