RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            21 November 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060007334


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Thomas Pagan                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Peter Fisher                  |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne Douglas               |     |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 on his DD Form 214 be
changed from a “3” to a “1”.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was erroneously issued a RE
Code of “3” at the time of his release from active duty (REFRAD) and he now
desires to re-enter the service but is unable to do so because of his RE
Code.

3.  The applicant provides a narrative explanation of his application, a
photocopy of his identification card and a copy of a letter to his
congressional representative.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 14 July 2000.  The application submitted in this case is
dated16 May 2006.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army in Brooklyn, New York, on 16
July 1998 for a period of 2 years and 20 weeks, training as an Avenger
crewman, and enrollment in the Army College Fund.  He completed his
training at Fort Bliss, Texas and was transferred to Fort Polk, Louisiana.
He was advanced to the pay grade of E-1 on 1 March 1999.

4.  On 14 July 2000, he was honorably REFRAD in the pay grade of E-3, due
to the expiration of his term of service (ETS).  He had served 1 year, 11
months and 28 days of total active service and was issued a RE Code of “3”.
 His records indicate that he was ineligible for reenlistment at the time
of his REFRAD.

5.  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.

6.  RE-3 applies to persons who are not considered fully qualified for
reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but the
disqualification is waivable.  A  bar to reenlistment is one of those
instances in which a person would be issued a code of RE-3 at the time of
separation.

7.  Army Regulation 601-280 serves as the authority for reenlistments and
establishes reenlistment control points (RCP).  It provides, in pertinent
part, that soldiers in the pay grade of E-3 at the end of their enlistment
are not authorized to reenlist.  Soldiers who are reduced to the pay grade
of E-3 are not allowed to extend their enlistment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  At the time of the applicant’s REFRAD, he was still serving in the pay
grade of E-3.  Accordingly, he was properly issued a RE Code of “3” because
he had reached the RCP for his pay grade.

2.  By virtue of the applicant’s pay grade at the time of his REFRAD, he
was barred from reenlistment.  Inasmuch as he did not advance in grade past
the pay grade of E-3, he essentially barred himself from reenlistment and
his records properly reflect his ineligibility to reenlist.

3.  However, the applicant is not precluded from applying for a waiver of
his RE Code at the nearest recruiting office, should he desire to re-enter
military service. The needs of the service at the time of application
normally dictates whether a waiver will approved.

4.  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.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 14 July 2000; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 13 July 2003.  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

___TP___  ___PF __  ___LD __  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.




                                  _____ Thomas Pagan________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060007334                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061121                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |20000714                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, CH 4                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |RCP-REFRAD                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |4/RE CODE                               |
|1.100.0300              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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