IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 13 December 2012
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120010604
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 amendment of his reentry eligibility (RE) code from "3" to "1."
2. He states he "received a Chapter 16, under Honorable conditions" and RE code "3" was entered in his record. He states he received RE code "3" because his spouse was admitted to a psychological ward which hindered his ability to serve in the U.S. Army. He has since remarried, has been successfully married for 18 years, and has become a psychologist for the State of California. He requests a change of his RE code for enlistment purposes. He recently met with a recruiter for possible enlistment as a psychologist and the recruiter told him he "could request an upgrade if [his] status has changed significantly." He states he is an outstanding citizen who has made great strides in his life and he deserves an opportunity for an upgrade at this time.
3. He provides his marriage license and three letters describing his work as a psychologist.
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 13 November 1985, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. After completing initial entry training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 36C (Wire Systems Installer later converted to MOS 31L).
3. On 18 July 1988, his commander recommended his bar to reenlistment. His commander listed three reasons for imposing the bar:
* general counseling for dishonored checks
* a letter of reprimand for failure to maintain assigned equipment
* general counseling for Army Physical Fitness Test failure
4. The applicant acknowledged receipt of his commander's recommendation and acknowledged he had been counseled and advised of the basis for the action. He elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. The statement is not included in the available records.
5. On 20 July 1988, the bar to reenlistment was approved.
6. On 2 November 1988, he requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 16. In his request, he stated his bar to reenlistment coupled with his family problems prevented him from being a quality Soldier. He asked to be discharged as soon as possible.
7. On 2 December 1988, the separation authority directed his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b. On 5 January 1989, he was honorably discharged in accordance with the separation authority's direction.
8. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows in:
* item 25 (Separation Authority) "AR 635-200, para 16-5b"
* item 26 (Separation Code) "KGF"
* item 27 (RE Code) "RE-3"
* item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) "Locally imposed bar to reenlistment"
9. He provides an undated marriage license authorizing a clergyman or judge to marry him and M____ L____ W____.
10. He provides three letters describing his work as a school psychologist in California and Illinois. One of the letters describes him as a "consummate professional" who "has been an asset to the schools where he has served."
11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 16-5b of the version in effect at the time provided that Soldiers who perceived they would be unable to overcome a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment could apply for immediate discharge. The service of a Soldier discharged under this paragraph was to be characterized as honorable.
12. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designators (SPD)) provides the SPD code to be entered in item 26 of the DD Form 214. The version in effect at the time stated SPD code "KGF" would be entered on the DD Form 214 for Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, by reason of a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment.
13. The SPD/RE Code Cross-Reference Table provides instructions for determining the RE code for active Army and Reserve Component Soldiers. This Cross-Reference Table shows the SPD codes and corresponding RE codes. The table in effect at the time shows the SPD code of "KGF" has corresponding RE codes of "3" or "4."
14. Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) states individuals with an RE code of "3" are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but the disqualification is waivable.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The RE code on the applicant's DD Form 214 was assigned based on his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b. RE code "3" is associated with this type of discharge and it is properly entered on his DD Form 214.
2. The length of his marriage, his post-service professional achievements, and his desire to reenter military service, while commendable, are not a sufficient basis for changing an entry on his DD Form 214 that is correct.
3. His disqualification for reentry may be waived. He may discuss the waiver process with a recruiter. He should note, however, that waivers are granted based on the needs of the Army. Submitting a request for a waiver does not guarantee approval.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the requested relief.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X___ ____X___ ___X__ _ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
_______ _ 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) AR20120010604
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120010604
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
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 | CY2006 | 20060010305
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060010305 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. In his request, the applicant stated that he understood the once he was separated he would not be permitted to reenlist at a later date. In a letter of recommendation, dated 21 October 1988, the applicants former...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017394
A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 13 March 1990, shows the applicant voluntarily requested discharge from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 16, due to a bar to reenlistment. The regulation in effect at the time stated the reason for discharge based on separation code "KGF" was "[Headquarters, Department of the Army]-imposed bar to reenlistment or locally-imposed bar to reenlistment" and the regulatory authority was Army...
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 | CY2010 | 20100028065
The applicant was honorably separated from the ARNGUS and CAARNG on 29 January 1982 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Annual Training) to complete his Reserve obligation. On 7 May 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, with issuance of an Honorable Discharge Certificate. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table also shows RE code 4 as an appropriate RE code to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000829C070208
On 7 March 1985, the applicant’s unit commander prepared a Bar to Reenlistment Certificate (DA Form 4126-R) on her and requested she be barred from reenlistment based on her NJP record. 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. As a result, the Board further...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003165
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009616
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060009616 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, in effect, that his reentry (RE) code of 4 be changed so that he may reenlist in the Army. In his request, the applicant stated that he understood than once separated, he would not be permitted...