APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That the lost time shown on his DD Form 214 be removed.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he served one year in the Army Reserve to make up the lost time.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show: 

He was born on 22 July 1951.  He completed 9 years of formal education.  On 10 January 1960, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed basic combat training, advanced individual training and was awarded military occupation specialty 67N (UH-1 Helicopter Repairman).

On 20 May 1971, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) for the periods 9 November 1970 - 31 march 1971 and 12 - 19 April 1971.  His approved sentence was to be confined at hard labor for 60 days, that in excess of 30 days suspended, and to be reduced to pay grade E-1.

On 3 January 1972, the applicant was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-1, under a 6-month early release program to join an Army National Guard unit.  He had completed 2 years, 6 months and 1 day of creditable active service and had 173 days of lost time
.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

2.  In view of the fact that HQDA denied his request to reenlist, the assigned reentry eligibility code of RE-3 was and still is appropriate.  The applicant was disqualified from reenlistment, but the disqualification is waiverable.
(RE 2B would not have been appropriate, as that was for soldiers who voluntarily separated under an early release program; RE-2C would not have been appropriate, as that was for soldiers who had reached their reenlistment control point, which the applicant had not.)

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

                              Loren G. Harrell
					 	Director