RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 August 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070004321


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Michael J. Flynn              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry W. Racster              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald W. Steenfott           |     |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 reenlistment (RE) code be changed from
RE code 4 to RE code 3.

2.  The applicant states that, in a previous Board case, the U. S. Army
Human Resources Command revealed that a Soldier with less than 18 years of
active service and a 1987 separation date with a local bar to reenlistment
would have received an RE code of 3.

3.  The applicant states that he would like to apply for a waiver to
reenlist in the Regular Army as a direct commission officer as a physician
assistant.  He believes he is fully qualified to fill the needs of the Army
Medical Department as an officer and physician assistant.  He requests an
opportunity for his insight and judgment to be reassessed during the waiver
process.

4.  The applicant provides a self-authored, undated Narrative Summary
Request; his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty); an article concerning the Army’s recruitment of civilian physician
assistants for active service; an Army Public Affairs internet article
concerning the Army’s recruiting of physician assistants; a resume of his
qualifications as a U. S. Army civilian physician assistant; a DA Form 7222
(Senior System Civilian Evaluation Report); a DA Form 7222-1 (Senior System
Civilian Evaluation Report Support Form); and a position description.

5.  The applicant also provides extracts from his service personnel
records; four letters recommending him for appointment as a U. S. Army
Reserve officer; two physician assistant certifications; a letter, dated 28
August 1998, from the Physician Assistant Program, College of Health-
Related Professions; a certification from The University of the State of
New York; and a certificate from The University of the State of New York.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an
applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations
if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided
in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a
substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is
granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are
insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 November 1984.  He
completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded
military occupational specialty 12B (Combat Engineer).

3.  On 3 June 1986, a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment was imposed on
the applicant.  On 9 July 1986, the applicant requested discharge under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16 due to a bar to
reenlistment.  On 16 July 1986, his request was approved.

4.  On 6 August 1986, the applicant was honorably discharged under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b due to having a
locally-imposed bar to reenlistment.  He was given a separation code of KGF
and an RE code of 4.

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by
changes in service obligations.  Paragraph 16-5 applies to personnel denied
reenlistment and provides that Soldiers who receive Department of the Army
imposed or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they
will be unable to overcome the bar, may apply for immediate discharge.

6.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes)
prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other
directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military
service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated
reasons.  The regulation in effect at the time stated the reason for
discharge based on separation code “KGF” is “HQDA [Headquarters, Department
of the Army] imposed bar to reenlistment; or locally imposed bar to
reenlistment” and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200,
paragraph 16-5a or b.

7.  There is no Separation Program Designator Code/Reentry Code Cross
Reference Table available for the time in question.  However, on 9 August
2007 officials at the U. S. Army Human Resources Command informed the Board
analyst that a Soldier with less than 18 years of active service and an
August 1986 separation date with a local bar to reenlistment would have
received an RE code of 3.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was given an RE code of 4; however, it
appears he should have been given an RE code of 3.  His DD Form 214 should
be amended to change his RE code to 3.

BOARD VOTE:

__mjf___  __lwr___  __dws___  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that the DD
Form 214 of the individual concerned be amended to show he was given an RE
code of 3 instead of the RE code of 4 currently reflected on his DD Form
214.




                            __Michael J. Flynn____
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070004321                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070814                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.03                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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