RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 13 September 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070005003
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
Mr. Michael L. Engle
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. Thomas A. Pagan
Chairperson
Mr. Eric N. Andersen
Member
Mr. Paul M. Smith
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, that his Reenlistment (RE) code 4 be changed so that he may reenlist in the Army.
2. The applicant states that he was locally barred to reenlistment at the time of his discharge. He desperately wants to serve in the military again.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. On 29 October 1985, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years. He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 88N1O (Traffic Management Coordinator).
3. On 19 March 1986, the applicant was assigned as a movement specialist with the 229th Transportation Company in the Federal Republic of Germany.
4. On 1 June 1987 the applicant was promoted to specialist four, pay grade E4.
5. On 30 October 1987, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for wrongful use of marijuana. The punishment included reduction to private first class, pay grade E3 and 45 days extra duty.
6. On 3 June 1988, the applicant accepted NJP for disorderly conduct. The punishment included reduction to private, pay grade E2, forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months, and 45 days extra duty.
7. On 8 June 1988, the applicants commander initiated a Bar to Reenlistment (DA Form 4126). The commander based this action on the applicants two NJP, dishonored checks in August 1987, substantiated spousal abuse, and missed counseling sessions. The appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment on 20 June 1988. The applicant received a copy and elected not to appeal.
8. On 7 July 1988, the applicant requested immediate discharge because he believed that he could not overcome the locally imposed bar to reenlistment.
9. On 18 July 1988, the appropriate authority approved the applicants request for discharge.
10. On 10 August 1988, the applicant was discharged due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment, under the provisions of Army regulation 635-200, paragraph
16-5b. Accordingly, he was given a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KGF and an RE code 4. His character of service was honorable.
11. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5b of that regulation provides that Soldiers who perceive they will be unable to overcome a locally imposed bar to reenlistment may apply for immediate discharge.
12. Army Regulation 601-280 (Total Army Retention Program), in effect at the time, provided that Soldiers discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, would receive an RE code 4.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The RE code 4, identifying his ineligibility for enlistment/reenlistment, was correctly entered on his separation document in accordance with governing regulations. There is no evidence of error or injustice.
2. There is no apparent basis for removal or waiver of the applicants disqualification that established the basis for the RE code 4. While the applicants 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.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_TAP ___ __ENA__ __PMS___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
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.
_ Thomas A. Pagan___
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED
20070913
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
. . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
110.0200
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017031C070206
Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. RE–4 applies to persons not qualified for continued service by virtue of being separated from the service with non-waivable disqualifications such as persons with a local bar to reenlistment. The evidence shows that the applicant was discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065249C070421
On 8 January 1988, the applicant submitted a request to be discharged prior to his normal expiration of term of service (ETS) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16-5b, due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment. The separation authority’s approval of the applicant’s recommendation for discharge is not present in his file. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16-5b, due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment and was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017468C070206
This regulation in effect at the time of the applicant’s separation stated that the SPD code of KGF was the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of paragraph 16-5b of Army Regulation 635- 200, by the reason of locally imposed bar to reenlistment. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was discharged at his own request, based on his perception that he could not overcome his locally imposed bar to reenlistment. In accordance with Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018366
It explained, in pertinent part, that members separated under this provision who had a local bar to reenlistment with less than 18 years of service would be assigned the RE-3 code. By regulation, members separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, with an SPD code of KGF, based on a locally imposed bar to reenlistment would be assigned the RE-3 code. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was separated by reason of a locally imposed bar to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084646C070212
The applicant requests, in effect, that her reentry (RE) code of 4 be upgraded to a 2, that her separation code be changed, and that the bar to reenlistment be removed from her records. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant requested to be discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, paragraph 5b after being barred from reenlistment. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was given RE code 4.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002287
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070002287 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 applicant requests that his reentry (RE) code on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with the ending period 23 April 1987 be changed. The evidence of record shows the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084214C070212
He further states that he feels it unjust that he did not receive separation pay that other soldiers received who accepted early discharges during the draw-down and believes he should have been discharged in the pay grade of E-4, for the convenience of the government, with entitlement to compensation for his service. Chapter 6 of that regulation provides for barring from reenlistment individuals whose continued active duty is not in the best interest of the military service. It states, in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010415
On 23 November 1988, the applicant's immediate commander reviewed the applicant's statement and still recommended the applicant be barred. On 1 December 1989, the applicant's immediate commander reviewed the bar to reenlistment and recommended it remain in place. c. Although it is clear that the applicant neither completed the period of active service he enlisted for nor completed his 8-year statutory military service obligations, the determination of eligibility for MGIB benefits is not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002171C070206
Carmen Duncan | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He was only barred to reenlistment. The regulation in effect at the time of the applicant’s separation stipulated that an SPD code of KGF and RE-4 code would be assigned to members separating under the provisions of paragraph 16-5b, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of locally imposed bar to reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011737
On 12 November 1987, the applicant's commander initiated a local Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, recommending that the applicant be barred from reenlistment based on his NJP for wrongful use of marijuana. The form further shows: * he acknowledged that he received a copy of his commander's recommendation to bar him from further reenlistment * he was counseled and advised of the basis for the action * he indicated he did not desire to submit a statement in his own behalf * the bar to...