RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 June 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070000179


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Loretta D. Gulley             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Margaret K. Patterson         |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald D. Gant                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Rowland C. Heflin             |     |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, in effect, an upgrade of his reentry (RE) code
of RE-3.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he recovered from the car
accident he was in while in the military and wants his RE code upgraded so
that he may reenlist in the United States Coast Guard.

3.  The applicant provides his separation document (DD Form 214) in support
of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 29 July 2005.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
13 December 2006.

2.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and
entered active duty on 15 February 2002.  He was trained in, awarded, and
served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92F (Petroleum Supply
Specialist), and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty
was Private First Class (PFC).

3.  The applicant’s record does not contain a separation packet containing
the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his separation processing.
 There is a DD Form 214 on file that confirms the authority and reason for
his discharge.

4.  On 29 July 2005, the applicant was separated after completing 3 years,
5 months, and 15 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was
issued confirms he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 4-24B
(3), Army Regulation 635-40, by reason of disability with severance pay.
It also shows that based on the authority and reason for his separation, he
was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JFL, and an RE
code of RE-3.

5.  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 and
processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3
of that regulation prescribes the
basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That
chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.
RE-3 applies to persons who are not fully qualified for reentry or
continuous serve, but disqualification is waivable.

6.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) 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 states, in
pertinent part, that the SPD code of JFL is the appropriate code to assign
to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, by
reason of disability with severance pay.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference
Table included in the regulation establishes RE-3 as the proper code to
assign members separated with this SPD code.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request that his RE-3 code be changed was carefully
considered.  However, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support
granting the requested relief.

2.  The applicant’s separation processing, to include the SPD and RE code
assignments, 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.

3.  By regulation, the SPD code of JFL and the RE code of RE-3 are the
proper codes to assign members separated under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-40, by reason of physical disability with severance pay.
Therefore, the RE-3 code assignment was and remains valid.

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.  The applicant is advised that although his RE code has not been
upgraded, this does not mean that he is disqualified from reenlistment.  RE-
3 applies to persons who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or
continuous service; however, it does allow for a waiver of the
disqualification.  Therefore, if he desires to reenlist, the applicant
should contact a local 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

___MKP   ____RDG_  ___RCH_  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.




                                  ____Margaret K. Patterson_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070000179                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/06/14                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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