IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 December 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120010604 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 amendment of his reentry eligibility (RE) code from "3" to "1." 2. He states he "received a Chapter 16, under Honorable conditions" and RE code "3" was entered in his record. He states he received RE code "3" because his spouse was admitted to a psychological ward which hindered his ability to serve in the U.S. Army. He has since remarried, has been successfully married for 18 years, and has become a psychologist for the State of California. He requests a change of his RE code for enlistment purposes. He recently met with a recruiter for possible enlistment as a psychologist and the recruiter told him he "could request an upgrade if [his] status has changed significantly." He states he is an outstanding citizen who has made great strides in his life and he deserves an opportunity for an upgrade at this time. 3. He provides his marriage license and three letters describing his work as a psychologist. 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. On 13 November 1985, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. After completing initial entry training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 36C (Wire Systems Installer – later converted to MOS 31L). 3. On 18 July 1988, his commander recommended his bar to reenlistment. His commander listed three reasons for imposing the bar: * general counseling for dishonored checks * a letter of reprimand for failure to maintain assigned equipment * general counseling for Army Physical Fitness Test failure 4. The applicant acknowledged receipt of his commander's recommendation and acknowledged he had been counseled and advised of the basis for the action. He elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. The statement is not included in the available records. 5. On 20 July 1988, the bar to reenlistment was approved. 6. On 2 November 1988, he requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 16. In his request, he stated his bar to reenlistment coupled with his family problems prevented him from being a quality Soldier. He asked to be discharged as soon as possible. 7. On 2 December 1988, the separation authority directed his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b. On 5 January 1989, he was honorably discharged in accordance with the separation authority's direction. 8. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows in: * item 25 (Separation Authority) – "AR 635-200, para 16-5b" * item 26 (Separation Code) – "KGF" * item 27 (RE Code) – "RE-3" * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – "Locally imposed bar to reenlistment" 9. He provides an undated marriage license authorizing a clergyman or judge to marry him and M____ L____ W____. 10. He provides three letters describing his work as a school psychologist in California and Illinois. One of the letters describes him as a "consummate professional" who "has been an asset to the schools where he has served." 11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 16-5b of the version in effect at the time provided that Soldiers who perceived they would be unable to overcome a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment could apply for immediate discharge. The service of a Soldier discharged under this paragraph was to be characterized as honorable. 12. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designators (SPD)) provides the SPD code to be entered in item 26 of the DD Form 214. The version in effect at the time stated SPD code "KGF" would be entered on the DD Form 214 for Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, by reason of a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment. 13. The SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table provides instructions for determining the RE code for active Army and Reserve Component Soldiers. This Cross-Reference Table shows the SPD codes and corresponding RE codes. The table in effect at the time shows the SPD code of "KGF" has corresponding RE codes of "3" or "4." 14. Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) states individuals with an RE code of "3" are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but the disqualification is waivable. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The RE code on the applicant's DD Form 214 was assigned based on his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b. RE code "3" is associated with this type of discharge and it is properly entered on his DD Form 214. 2. The length of his marriage, his post-service professional achievements, and his desire to reenter military service, while commendable, are not a sufficient basis for changing an entry on his DD Form 214 that is correct. 3. His disqualification for reentry may be waived. He may discuss the waiver process with a recruiter. He should note, however, that waivers are granted based on the needs of the Army. Submitting a request for a waiver does not guarantee approval. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting 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 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) AR20120010604 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120010604 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1