RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        6 March 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010819


      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. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Acting Director      |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James Anderholm               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Scott Faught                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Roland 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 correction of his records to show that he was
assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of RE-1, or that he was discharged
by reason of physical disability.

2.  The applicant states that the Army did not want to pay for him if he
had been discharged due to medical reasons.  He states that he would like
to be able to go to a veteran hospital, to get veterans benefits, and to
get back pay from the date of his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides in support of his application, a copy of his
Report of Medical Examination and a copy of his Certificate of Release or
Discharge From Active Duty (DD Form 214).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 24 September 1982.  The application submitted in this
case is dated 4 April 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.  On 6 January 1982, he enlisted in the North Carolina Army National
Guard (NCARNG) for 6 years, in the pay grade of E-3.  He was ordered to
active duty for training (ADT) on 19 April 1982.  He was released from ADT
on
24 September 1882, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
paragraph 5-7, for failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.
The DD Form 214 that he was furnished at the time of his release from ADT
indicates that he completed 5 months and 6 days of ADT, and he was
transferred to the NCARNG for discharge and transfer to the United States
Army Control Group (Annual Training).  He was assigned an RE-3 code.



4.  The applicant's National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 indicates that he
was honorably discharged from the NCARNG on 24 September 1982, under the
provisions of Army Regulation 600-200, due to unsuitability and transferred
to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training).

5.  On 16 November 1985, the applicant underwent a medical examination for
the purpose of reenlistment.  The attending physician found the applicant
to be medically qualified for retention in the USAR.

6.  The available records indicate that orders were published on 6 January
1988 discharging the applicant from the USAR under the provisions of Army
Regulation 135-178, upon completion on his required service.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200 serves as the authority for enlisted
separations and discharges.  Chapter 5 of that regulation provides for the
separation of personnel who did not meet procurement medical fitness
standards.  It states, in pertinent part, that Soldiers who were not
medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when
accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these
standards prior to entry on active duty, will be separated. Medical
proceedings, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a
medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within 6
months of the Soldier’s entry on active duty.  Personnel in an entry-level
status will not have their service characterized.

8.  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
processing into the Regular Army and the USAR.  Chapter 3 of that
regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for
enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes.

9.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but
the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have received
nonjudicial punishment are so disqualified, as are persons with bars to
reenlistment, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters 5, 9,
10, 13, 14, and 16 of Army Regulation 635-200.  A waiting period of 2 years
from separation is required before a waiver may be submitted.

10.  Army Regulation 40-501, at chapter 3, provides standards for medical
retention.  Basically, members with conditions as severe as listed in this
chapter are considered medically unfit for retention on active duty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  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.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in
accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations
of the applicant’s rights.

3.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  However, there is no
evidence in the available records nor has the applicant submitted any
evidence to support his contention that he should have been processed
through medical channels at the time of his release from active duty.
Additionally, on 16 November 1985, the applicant underwent a medical
examination for the purpose of reenlistment and he was found to be
medically qualified for retention in the USAR.  If he had a desire to
enlist in the Regular Army, he could have submitted a request for a waiver
of any disqualification that he may have had and there is no evidence in
the available record that shows he submitted any waiver requests.

4.  The applicant was released from ADT under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-200, chapter 5 for failure to meet procurement medical
fitness standards.  Therefore, he was properly issued an RE-3 code in
accordance with the applicable regulations.

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

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 24 September 1982; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 23 September 1985.  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                 |AR20060010819                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070306                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |GD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19820924                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 600-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |547/UNSUITABILITY                       |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  4    |100.0300/REENTRY CODE                   |
|2.  189                 |110.0000/SEPARATION DOCUMENT            |
|3.  191                 |100.0200/REASON AND AUTHORITY           |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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