RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        01 FEBRUARY 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004107015


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Walter Morrison               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John Meixell                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. William Powers                |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his reentry (RE) code in item 27 of his
          DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty) be changed from RE-3 to RE-1.

2.  The applicant states at the time of his discharge he was a sole parent;
however, he is now married, and should be eligible for reentry [into the
Army] without a waiver.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of a
marriage license.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 19 June 1992.  The application submitted in this case is
dated        27 March 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant served as an Army Reserve member from May 1984 until
September 1985.  On 3 December 1985 he enlisted in the Regular Army for
   3 years.  He was released from active duty on 5 December 1988.

4.  On 11 July 1989 the applicant reenlisted in the Army in pay grade E-4
for       4 years.  He completed training as an intelligence analyst and
was assigned to the 3d Infantry Division in Germany.  He served in Saudi
Arabia from December 1990 to May 1991.

5.  In July 1991 the applicant was divorced from his wife and awarded
custody of their son, a minor child.

6.  On 12 May 1992 the applicant, then assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado,
requested a hardship discharge based on the fact that he was a sole parent,
as a result of his 1991 divorce decree.
7.  On 28 May 1992 the separation authority approved his request and
directed that his service be characterized as honorable.

8.  The applicant was discharged on 19 June 1992 under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 6-3b(2).  His reentry code on his DD
Form 214 is listed as RE-3.

9.  The copy of the marriage certificate that the applicant submits with
his request shows that he remarried on 1 January 1999.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the separation of enlisted
personnel.  Paragraph 6-3b(2) states, in effect, that a Soldier who is a
sole parent may be discharged for hardship.

11.  Pertinent Army regulations provide 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 601-210
covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and
processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3
of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service
applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE
codes, including RA RE codes.  A Soldier discharged because of hardship
requires a waiver in order to reenlist.  A reentry code of “3” indicates
that a person is ineligible for reenlistment unless a waiver is granted.

12.  That regulation also states in pertinent part that prior service
personnel will be advised that RE codes may be changed only if they are
determined to be administratively incorrect.  Applicants who have correct
RE codes will be processed for a waiver at their request if otherwise
qualified and waiver is authorized.  Recruiting personnel are authorized to
process requests for waiver.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's reentry code on his 19 June 1992 DD Form 214 is
correct.  This, the applicant does not dispute.

2.  The fact, however, that he remarried in 1999 does not require that the
reentry code be changed in order to accommodate him.  Notwithstanding his
contention, he is not eligible to reenlist in the Army without a waiver.

3.  Consequently, the applicant's request to correct his reentry code on
his        19 June 1992 DD Form 214 is not granted.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 19 June 1992; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on         18 June 1995.  However, the applicant did not file
within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling
explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice
to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___WM__  ___JM __  ___WP  _  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.





                                  _____Walter Morrison_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004107015                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050201                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]