BOARD DATE:	  18 January 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100017759 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to reflect that he entered active duty on 24 June 1974 instead of 15 June 1977 as currently reflected, that his completion of the Stock Control and Accounting Course at Fort Lee, Virginia, be added to his DD Form 214, and that his reenlistment (RE) code be changed to a more favorable code.

2.  The applicant states his DD Form 214 incorrectly reflects that he entered active duty on 15 June 1977, when he entered on 24 June 1974.  He also states he completed the Stock Control and Accounting Course at Fort Lee and the course is not reflected on his DD Form 214.  He also states that his RE Code is incorrect because he completed a program at Fort Bragg called “CCF” and was told he would be able to reenlist once he completed CCF.  Additionally, the codes hinder his government employment.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 2 September 1982.

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 U.S. Army Reserve under the Delayed Entry Program in Atlanta, Georgia, on 24 July 1974 for a period of 6 years.

3.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 August 1974 for a period of 3 years, training as a repair parts specialist, and assignment to Fort Benning, Georgia.  He completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and advanced individual training as a stock control and accounting specialist at Fort Lee, Virginia, before being transferred to Fort Benning.

4.  On 14 June 1977, while serving in pay grade E-3, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment and was issued a DD Form 214 to reflect his service from 6 August 1974 to 14 June 1977, which is properly filed in his official military personnel file.  He had 2 years, 10 months, and 9 days of total active service.

5.  On 15 June 1977, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years and training as a medical supply specialist.  He completed training at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, and was awarded the military occupational specialty of medical supply specialist.

6.  On 6 May 1981, while stationed in Germany, the applicant was convicted by a Special Court-Martial of three specifications of wrongful possession of marijuana in the hashish form and three specifications of the wrongful sale of marijuana in the hashish form.  One of the elements of his punishment was confinement at hard labor for 3 months.  He was transferred to Fort Bragg, North Carolina to serve his confinement in the Correctional Custody Facility. 

7.  The applicant continued to serve until he was honorably discharged in pay grade E-2 at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on 2 September 1982 due to completion of required service.  His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his discharge reflects that he had 5 years and 23 months of active service during his current enlistment and 2 years, 10 months, and 9 days of prior active service.  It also reflects that he completed the Medical Supply Specialist Course during his current enlistment.  He was issued  the RE codes of 3, 3B, and 3C based on his separation code of “JBK.”

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  Prior to 1 October 1979, the regulation required that a DD Form 214 be issued for each period of service.  Effective 1 October 1979, the regulation changed and provided that a DD Form 214 would not be issued for cases involving immediate reenlistment or in any circumstances where there was not a break in service of more than 24 hours.  Additionally, the regulation provided that in cases where a previous DD Form 214 was issued, the next DD Form 214 would begin at the next period of service and prior service would be reflected in the appropriate areas of the DD Form 214.  It also provided that only military education completed during the period covered by the DD Form 214 would be entered on the DD Form 214, provided it was a formal course of at least 1 week in duration.

9.  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.

10.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have received court-martials are so disqualified, as are persons with bars to reenlistment, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters 5, 9, 10, 11, 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1.  At the time the applicant was discharged in 1977 he was properly issued a DD Form 214 to reflect his service up to the time of his discharge in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time.  However, that form did not reflect his completion of the 8-week stock control and accounting course he completed in 1974.

2.  He reenlisted the following day on 15 June 1977 and served until his discharge on 2 September 1982.  His DD Form 214 properly reflects his service during this period and also reflects his prior active service from 4 August 1974 to 14 June 1977.

3.  The applicant did not complete the Stock Control and Accounting Course during the period covered by his DD Form 214 for the period ending 2 September 1982 and, therefore, it was properly not entered on that form.  Accordingly, it appears that his DD Form 214 was properly prepared in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time and that there is no basis to grant his request to change that DD Form 214.

4.  However, though not requested by the applicant, his DD Form 214 issued on 14 April 1977 should be corrected to reflect in the remarks section (block 27) his completion of the stock control and accounting course for 8 weeks in 1974.

5.  The applicant’s contention that his records should be corrected to show that he entered the service in June 1974 has been noted and found to lack merit.  The evidence of record shows he enlisted on 6 August 1974.  He was issued a DD Form 214 on 14 June 1977 that reflects his service from 6 August 1974 to 1977 and his DD Form 214 issued on 15 June 1977 correctly reflects his prior active service.  Accordingly, his service is all accounted for and there is no basis to make the requested change.  A copy of his first DD Form 214 will be provided to him.

6.  The applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation        635-200, chapter 2 and had received a court-martial; therefore; he was properly issued RE code of 3, 3B, and 3C in accordance with the applicable regulations.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that he was issued the wrong RE codes at the time of his separation. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___x___  ___x____  ___x____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing in the remarks section (block 27) of his DD Form 214 dated 14 April 1977, his completion of the stock control and accounting course for 8 weeks in 1974.



2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to correction of his DD Form 214 dated 2 September 1982 to show he entered active duty in June 1974 or to change his RE codes on that form. 




      ___________x______________
                 CHAIRPERSON

I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100017759



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100017759



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1