Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003640
Original file (20130003640.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  8 October 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130003640 


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 that the separation code on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to a more favorable code.

2.  The applicant states the separation code on his DD Form 214 is incorrect because it reflects that he served less than 180 days of service and he has been denied benefits by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) because of the code.  He served almost 2 years of service.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his 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 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 12 September 1984 for a period of 3 years and training as an aircraft weapons systems repairer.  He completed his basic training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and his advanced individual training at Fort Eustis, Virginia, before being transferred to Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia, for his first and only assignment.  

3.  On 7 June 1985, he was counseled regarding his writing bad checks and his identification card was over-stamped.

4.  On 30 July 1985, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for not shaving.

5.  On 16 August 1985, he was again counseled regarding writing bad checks.

6.  On 19 November 1985, NJP was imposed against him for his repeated failure to secure his wall locker.

7.  On 7 February 1986, the applicant tested positive for marijuana in a urinalysis.

8.  On 6 May 1986, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating a bar to reenlistment against the applicant for testing positive during a urinalysis, substandard duty performance and lack of self discipline, and minor disciplinary infractions (failure to follow orders and writing bad checks).  The applicant declined the opportunity to submit a statement in his own behalf.

9.  The appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment on 27 May 1986.

10.  On 12 August 1986, the applicant submitted a request to be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b due to his perception that he would not be able to overcome the locally-imposed bar to reenlistment.

11.  The appropriate authority approved his request on 13 August 1986 and directed that he be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

12.  Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 3 September 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 16-5b, due to a locally-imposed bar to reenlistment.  He was issued a separation code of “KGF” which denotes separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, due to a
locally-imposed bar to reenlistment.

13.  Pertinent Army Regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry (RE) codes, based on their service records or reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the RA and the U.S. 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.

14.  RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  The applicable regulations direct that an RE code of “4” be issued for a separation code of “KGF,” which indicates separation for a locally or Department of the Army imposed bar to reenlistment.
 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant’s rights.

2.  The applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation        635-200, paragraph 16-5b and properly issued an RE code of 4 based upon his reason for discharge in accordance with the applicable regulations.

3.  Although the applicant has not provided any evidence regarding his denial of benefits by the VA, that agency operates under its own laws and regulations and the Board has no authority over that agency.  However, the Board does not change records simply to qualify individuals for benefits, especially when there is no error or injustice involved.

4.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to change a properly issued separation code.

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 that 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)                                         AR20130003640





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130003640



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003165

    Original file (20130003165.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028065

    Original file (20100028065.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 20090010347

    Original file (20090010347.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states, in effect, that his separation and RE codes are in error because he was not told why he was being barred from reenlistment. The SPD code of “KGF” had a corresponding RE Code of “4.” The regulation also specified that an RE Code of RE-3 would be applied when there was a locally imposed bar to reenlistment and the Soldier had less than 18 years active service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011791

    Original file (20080011791.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his bar to reenlistment be waived, in effect, an upgrade of his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code. On 3 February 1987, the applicant requested to be separated under the provisions of paragraph 16-5, Army Regulation 635-200. Therefore, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant's records to show a RE Code of "RE-3" which is consistent with the basis for his reason for separation and the number of years he had served at the time of separation.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069751C070402

    Original file (2002069751C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011176

    Original file (20110011176.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he completed 2 full years of service. On 1 October 1987, the applicant submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) requesting immediate separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 16-5b(1), by reason of inability to overcome a locally imposed bar to reenlistment. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015110

    Original file (20090015110.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his reenlistment (RE) code of RE-3 & 4 be changed to a more favorable RE code. Paragraph 16-5, in effect at the time, provided the authority for Soldiers denied or ineligible for continued active duty service to be separated upon their request. However, the RE-3 code does allow his enlistment with a waiver.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010604

    Original file (20120010604.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. 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. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014488

    Original file (20080014488.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 5 March 1986, the applicant requested immediate discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 16. Army Regulation 601-280 (Army Retention Program) states that the RE codes contained on military discharge documents determine whether or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007765

    Original file (20080007765.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He may want to reenlist, but the RE code is RE code 4. He was given a separation code of KGF (Headquarters, Department of the Army imposed bar to reenlistment or locally-imposed bar to reenlistment under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraphs 16-5a or 16-5b) and an RE code of 4. Based upon his years of active service and his locally-imposed bar to reenlistment, he should have been given an RE code of 3, not an RE code of 4.