RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  6 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060009616 


	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.



	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, in effect, that his reentry (RE) code of 4 be changed so that he may reenlist in the Army.

2.  The applicant essentially states that he does not deny that in 1987, he declared himself a conscientious objector, which resulted in a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment and his subsequent discharge.  He also states, in effect, that he was a foolish 18-year old at the time, and that much has changed since then, both for him personally and for our Nation.  He further states that he now sees the need to occasionally take up arms in defense of his family and our country, and requests that he be given another chance to have the honor to do so. 

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 214ws (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty Worksheet) in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 27 May 1987, the date of his discharge from the Regular Army.  The application submitted in this case is dated 1 July 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’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 
17 July 1986.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13F (Fire Support Specialist).  He then departed for an overseas tour in Korea on 15 January 1987.

4.  On 24 April 1987, a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment was issued to the applicant.  In the Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, the applicant’s company commander stated that the applicant recently expressed a desire not to use military weapons in any form, and that because of this desire, he recommended that the applicant be barred from reenlistment.

5.  On 26 April 1987, the applicant requested that he be discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel), Paragraph 
16-5b (Locally Imposed Bars to Reenlistment).  In his request, the applicant stated that he understood than once separated, he would not be permitted to reenlist at a later date.

6.  On or about 27 April 1987, the proper authority approved that applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 16-5.  On 27 May 1987, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his DD Form 214 has an entry of “Locally Imposed Bar to Reenlistment.”  Item 26 (Separation Code) has a Separation Program Designator (SPD) of “KGF.”  The SPD code of “KGF” translates into “Locally Imposed Bar to Reenlistment.”  The SPD code of “KGF” was also the appropriate code for the applicant based upon the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator [SPD] Codes) for Soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-200, Paragraph 16-5b, for a locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes RE code 4 as the proper RE code to assign to soldiers discharged for this reason.

7.  Paragraph 2-1 of Army Regulation 635-5-1 provides that SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty. The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation.  They are intended exclusively for the internal use of Department of Defense (DOD) and the military services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data.  

8.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program) prescribes eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army and the Army Reserve.  This regulation provides that RE codes may only be changed if they are determined to be administratively incorrect. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his RE code of 4 should be changed so that he may reenlist in the Army.

2.  The applicant’s RE code of 4, establishing his ineligibility for enlistment/ reenlistment, was correctly entered on his separation document in accordance with governing regulations.
3.  There is no apparent basis for removal or waiver of the applicant’s disqualification that established the basis for the RE Code 4.  While the applicant’s desire to continue in the service to his country is commendable, there are no provisions authorizing the change of an RE code for this purpose.

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

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 27 May 1987; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
26 May 1990.  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

___JA___  ___SF  __  ___RV __  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.



____James Anderholm_______
          CHAIRPERSON
INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060009616
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070306
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
AR 15-185
ISSUES         1.
110.0000.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.