IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 December 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100017638 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, correction of his reenlistment (RE) code. 2. The applicant states, in effect, the information recorded on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) is not accurate and has no basis. He claims he recently learned, after seeking employment, that his RE code is incorrect. 3. The applicant provides: * a self-authored statement, dated 13 June 2010 * DD Form 214 * Standard Form (SF) 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) (2 pages) * SF 538 (Abbreviated Medical Record) (2 pages) * SF 509 (Medical Record Progress Notes) 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 record shows he enlisted in the Louisiana Army National Guard (LAARNG) on 26 February 1987 and was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) on 14 July 1987. He completed one station unit training, was awarded military occupational specialty 12B (Combat Engineer), and was released from ADT on 22 October 1987. Item 23 (Type of Separation) of his DD Form 214 contains the entry "Relief from ADT." Item 27 (Reenlistment Code) contains the entry "NA." 3. He submitted a self-authored statement, dated June 13, 2010, in which he states, in effect, that he was severely seasick, hospitalized, and under frequent medical care once at sea. His condition caused him to be sent to a land hospital for treatment. He assumed his release from active duty was for seasickness. 4. Additionally, he submitted 5 pages of medical documentation, SF 600 (2 pages), SF 538 (2 pages), and SF 509, which provide summary notes of his medical treatment while a member of the United States Navy. 5. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214. Table 2-1 of this regulation prescribes the preparation instructions relative to the DD Form 214. It states for item 27, "Enter 'NA' for ARNGUS or USAR members released after serving on ADT or for ARNG members after serving on Full Time Training Duty (FTTD)." DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request for correction of his RE code has been carefully considered; however, there is insufficient evidence to support his request. 2. The submitted documentation concerns a medical condition, and subsequent treatment progress, which occurred after the date of separation on the DD Form 214 in question, while he was a member of the United States Navy. Therefore, the submitted documents are irrelevant to this case. 3. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing, to include his RE code assignment, 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 throughput the separation process. As a result, based on his record of service and absent any evidence of error or injustice in the separation process, the RE code assigned the applicant was and remains valid. Therefore, the record is correct and he is not entitled to the requested relief. 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) AR20100017638 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100017638 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1