RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        11 October 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060000639


      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. John J. Wendland, Jr.         |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Patrick H. McGann             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. David R. Gallagher            |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Roland S. Venable             |     |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 upgrade of his reentry eligibility (RE) code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has a RE Code of RE-3 and
would like it changed so that he may rejoin the U.S. Army.  He also states,
in effect, that his prior military service record indicates no offenses
other than being absent without leave (AWOL), which he acknowledges was a
foolish mistake that he now regrets, and takes full responsibility for his
actions.  He further states, in effect, that since his discharge from the
U.S. Army he has been active in politics, community service, served as an
admissions officer for the University of Phoenix/ Hawaii, and is both a
state and federally approved stock broker.  He adds, in effect, that he has
quit smoking, lost nearly 40 pounds, and works out 2 hours a day.  He also
states that he has passed the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
(ASVAB) and medical/physical examination offered to him at the Military
Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) in Des Plaines, Illinois.  He is
currently taking a Pimsleur course in Eastern Arabic, which is approved and
accredited by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and wants to enter
the U.S. Army as a translator of Eastern Arabic.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement that includes a list
of immediate family and personal references; DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty), with an effective date of 5 August
1991; New York University, Office of the Registrar, New York City, New
York, college transcript; Elk Grove High School, Elk Grove Village,
Illinois, high school transcript; County of Cook, State of Illinois, Office
of the County Clerk, Certification of Birth, issued 27 October 1993; and
Social Security Administration, Social Security Card.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on
5 August 1991, the date of his discharge.  The application submitted in
this case is dated 13 December 2005.

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 limitations 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’s military service records show that he enlisted in the
U.S. Army and entered active duty on 2 October 1990 for a period of 5
years.  Upon completion of basic combat training and advanced individual
training, the applicant was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS)
75B (Personnel Administration Specialist).

4.  The applicant’s service records contain a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet),
which shows, in pertinent part, that on or about 4 January 1991 the
applicant went AWOL and remained absent from his unit until on or about 31
May 1991.

 5.  On 10 June 1991, the applicant requested a discharge for the good of
the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of
chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted
Personnel).  The applicant's legal counsel certified that he had advised
the applicant of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial
under circumstances which could lead to an under other than honorable
discharge, of the effects of the request for discharge, and the rights
available to the applicant.

6.  On 8 July 1991, the colonel serving as commander of Headquarters, Law
Enforcement Command, U.S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox,
Kentucky, approved the applicant's request for discharge from the U.S. Army
under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed
that an Under Other Than Honorable Discharge Certificate be furnished the
applicant. The commanding officer also directed that the applicant be
reduced to the lowest enlisted grade effective the date of the approval of
the discharge.

7.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that he was discharged under other
than honorable conditions, on 5 August 1991, in accordance with the
provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the
service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The DD Form 214 also shows
that, based on the authority and reason for his discharge, the applicant
was assigned a separation program designator (SPD) code of KFS and a RE
code of RE-3.  At the time of his discharge, the applicant served 5 months
and 7 days of net active service during the period under review.

8.  There is no evidence showing that the applicant applied to the Army
Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year
statute of limitations.

9.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designators) provides the
specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating
Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form
214.  It identifies the SPD code of KFS as the appropriate code to assign
RA Soldiers discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation
635-200, who are discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by
court-martial.

10.  Pertinent Army regulations, in effect at the time of the applicant's
discharge, provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, the
individual will be assigned a RE code, based on their military service
records or the reason for discharge.  RE-3 applies to a person who is not
considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the time of
separation, but disqualification is waivable.

11.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment
Program) prescribes eligibility criteria governing the enlistment of
persons, with or without prior service (PS), into the Regular Army (RA) and
the Army Reserve (AR).  Paragraph 3-20 (Verification of prior service)
provides, in pertinent part, that applicants who are thought to have had,
or who claim to have had PS in any U.S. Armed Force will not be enlisted in
the RA or AR until their PS, if any, is verified.  Authorized personnel
with access to the Defense Management Data Center (DMDC) via the Recruiter
Eligibility Data Display may obtain reentry eligibility data.

12.  Army Regulation 601-210 also provides that applicants who do not meet
established enlistment standards are not eligible for enlistment unless a
waiver is authorized.  Recruiters do not have the authority to disapprove a
waiver request or to refuse to forward an applicant's request to the
approval authority. Commanders cited in this regulation have the authority
to approve waivers as appropriate.  The burden is on the applicant to prove
to waiver authorities that he or she has overcome their disqualifications
for enlistment and that their acceptance would be in the best interests of
the Army.  Waiver authorities will apply the "whole person" concept when
considering waiver applications.  Unless indicated otherwise in the
regulation, requests for waiver and other actions that require approval by
the Commanding General, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (USA HRC),
Alexandria, Virginia (for the RA); Commander, USA HRC, St. Louis, Missouri
(for the AR); or Commanding General, U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC),
will be forwarded by the recruiter to the appropriate e-mail address.
Every effort will be made to ensure capture of the electronic record of
waiver starting at the recruiting station level.
13.  There is no indication in the applicant’s military service records
that he has ever applied for a waiver to reenter the RA or AR and/or that
this request was denied.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his RE code should be upgraded so that he
may rejoin the U.S. Army.  The supporting evidence he provided was
carefully considered; however, he provides insufficient documentary
evidence to support his claim.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s RA separation
processing 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 throughout the separation process.  As a
result, his separation was proper and equitable, and the RE-3 code he
received was appropriately assigned based on the authority and reason for
his separation.  As a result, the RE-3 code assigned was and remains valid.

3.  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 this requirement.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 5 August 1991; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on
4 August 1994.  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.

5.  The applicant is advised that although no change is being recommended
to his RE code, this does not mean that he is disqualified from reentering
the U.S. Army.  The RE-3 code he was assigned applies to persons who are
not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the
time of separation, but the disqualification is waivable.  If the applicant
still desires to reenter the U.S. Army, he should contact a local Army
recruiter to determine his eligibility.  Those individuals can best advise
a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are
required to process waivers of RE codes.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__PHM__  ___DRG _  __RSV__  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.




                                  ____Patrick H. McGann___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060000639                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061011                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UOTHC                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19910805                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, Chapter 10                  |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |For the Good of the Service in Lieu of  |
|                        |CM                                      |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.0300.0000                           |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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