RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	22 January 2008  
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070009382 


	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. Judy Blanchard

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. James Vick

Chairperson

Mr. Thomas Ray

Member

Mr. Jeffrey Redmann

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 Reentry (RE) Code on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from a code of "RE-4" to RE 3 or 2 and the reason for separation also be changed.  He also request’s that the imposed bar to reenlistment be removed.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he had a commendable record prior to being assigned to his last duty station.  He believes that the bar to reenlistment was due to a personality conflict and not from his performance of service.  He adds that he was separated from his family who lived in Georgia by choice.  It was a very difficult time for him without his family and the separation caused a hardship for him.  He had just came off deployment from the Gulf War then 
2 months later he was deployed to Iraq.  When he was coming back from deployment he received a letter from his wife asking for a divorce, needless to say the Army was not on his mind 100% and that is when things started to go wrong.      

3.  The applicant provides a self authored letter in support of his application. 

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.  On 29 August 1975, the applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  His military occupational specialty (MOS) was 11B (Infantryman/ Dragon Gunnery).  His service was continuous through a series of reenlistments and the highest grade he attained was pay grade E-6.

3.  The applicant’s record indicates that he accepted non judicial punishment on 12 December 1973, 22 July 1976, 6 February 1979 and 8 May 1980.  Details of the incidents are missing from his file.
4.  On 3 March 1992, the applicant was barred from reenlistment.  The documents associated with the applicant’s QMP action are missing from his record.  

5.  The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge processing are not available for review.  However, the evidence does include a properly constituted DD Form 214 that shows on 1 June 1992, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of paragraph 16-8, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of HQDA Imposed Bar to Reenlistment.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time confirms that he had completed 16 years, 9 months, and 3 days of active military service and held the pay grade of E-6.  This document also confirms that based on the authority and reason for his separation, he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KGF and an RE code of RE-4.  

6.  There is no indication in the record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board to request a change in the narrative reason for his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.  

7.  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 KGF is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of paragraph 16-8, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of 
HQDA Imposed Bar to Reenlistment.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table included in the regulation establishes RE-4 as the proper code to assign members separated with this SPD code.  

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 and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA, RE codes.  RE-4 applies to persons who are permanently disqualified for continued Army service.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, then in effect, set forth policy and prescribed the procedures for denying reenlistment under the QMP.  This program is based on the premise that reenlistment is a privilege for those whose performance, conduct, attitude, and potential for advancement meet Army standards.  It is designed to enhance the quality of the career-enlisted force, selectively retain the best-qualified Soldiers to 30 years of active duty, deny reenlistment to non-progressive and nonproductive Soldiers, and encourage Soldiers to maintain their eligibility for further service. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence is void of a discharge packet containing the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to the applicant’s discharge.  However, there is a properly constituted DD Form 214 on file.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge.  Therefore, Government regularity in the discharge process is presumed.

2.  In the absence of any evidence of record or independent evidence to the contrary, it is concluded that the applicant was properly separated in accordance with the regulations then in effect, governing those Soldiers denied reenlistment under the QMP.  He was assigned the proper RE code for his particular narrative reason for separation.

3.  The applicant has provided this Board with no evidence that supports a basis for changing his narrative reason for separation or his RE-code of RE-4.  The assigned codes are still appropriate.  He was barred from reenlistment under the QMP after a DA Selection Board reviewed his records and determined that he was no longer eligible for reenlistment due to his past performance and conduct. 

4.  The QMP is a tool used by the Army to ensure a quality force and as such was designed to deny continued service to those Soldiers whose past performance or future potential does not meet the stringent requirements for continued service.  The applicant has provided no evidence to support that his case is so extraordinary or that his overall service was so outstanding that removal of the bar is warranted.

5.  RE-4 applies to persons who are permanently disqualified for continued Army service.

6.  Therefore, 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.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____JV__  ___TR___  ___JR___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.





______James Vick___________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070009382
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
22080122
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
100.0300
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.