RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            07 SEPTEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060003059


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Susan Powers                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Jonathan Rost                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David Haasenritter            |     |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 eligibility (RE) code be
changed to one which would allow him to reenlist.

2.  The applicant states that he would like to join a different military
service and an RE-3 code requires a waiver that is difficult to obtain.  He
states that he was not discharged due to disciplinary reasons or under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice.  He states that he was furnished an
honorable discharge; therefore, there is no reason why he should have been
furnished an RE-3 code.

3.  The applicant provides in support of is application, copies of
documents that are maintained in his Official Military Personnel File.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 12 September 2003, the applicant enlisted in the United States Army
Reserve (USAR), under the Delayed Entry Program, for 8 years, in the pay
grade of E-2.

2.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 May 2005, for 5 years, in the pay
grade of E-4.  His Statement of Understanding shows that he enlisted under
the United States Army Training Enlistment Program with assurance of
attending the 18X Special Forces Recruit Training.  The Statement of
Understanding also indicates that if he failed to complete the Special
Forces Assessment and Selection (SAFS) Course, he would be separated from
the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, due
to entry level status performance and conduct.

3.  On 23 November 2005, the applicant was counseled regarding his
performance and conduct.  His counselor cited erroneous enlistment as a
basis for the counseling.  During the counseling, the applicant was
informed that he was being considered for separation from the Army in
accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 7-15, as his contract
stated that if he failed to complete SFAS, he would be separated from the
Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, due to
entry level status performance and conduct.  He was further informed that
since he had exceeded the 180-day limit required to receive a chapter 11,
he would be separated under the provisions of chapter 7-15.  He was told
that he would be furnished an honorable discharge.



4.  On 5 December 2005, the applicant was notified that he was being
recommended for discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 7-15, due to erroneous enlistment.  He acknowledged receipt of the
notification, and after consulting with counsel, he opted not to submit a
statement in his own behalf.

5.  After the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for
discharge, the applicant was honorably discharged on 18 January 2006, under
the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 7, due to erroneous
entry.  He had completed 7 months and 26 days of net active service, and he
was assigned a JFC (erroneous entry) separation code; and an RE-3 code.

6.  An RE-3 code applies to persons not qualified for continued Army
service, but the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have
received bars to reenlistment, and those discharged under the provisions of
chapters 7, 9, 10, 13, and 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 are so
disqualified.

7.  Army Regulation 601-210 provides the guidance for the issuance of RE
codes upon separation from active duty.  It states, in pertinent part, that
these codes are not to be considered derogatory in nature, they are simply
codes that are used for identification of an enlistment processing
procedure.  This regulation further states that when a Soldier is assigned
a JFC separation code, he/she will be assigned an RE-3 code.

8.  Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining
whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.  They are required
to process a request for waiver under the provisions of chapter 4, Army
Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program).
Therefore, since enlistment criteria does change, and since the applicant
has the right to apply for a waiver, it is suggested that he periodically
visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a
waiver.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no basis for removal of the RE code from the applicant's
record.  The disqualification upon which the code was based however, can be
waived for reenlistment purposes.

2.  The applicant was separated and assigned an RE code in accordance with
regulations then in effect.


3.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  However, as previously
stated, recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially
determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.
Therefore, he should visit his local recruiting station to apply for a
waiver.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show 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.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__DH ___  ___JR  __  ___SP __  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.





                                  ______Susan Powers______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060003059                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060907                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |20060118                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, CH 7, SEC III               |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ERRONEOUS ENTRY                         |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000/ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS         |
|2.  4                   |100.0300/CHANGE OF RE CODE              |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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