MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            17 October 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2000039587

	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.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  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 determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his reentry (RE) code of RE-3 be changed and the entry concerning lost time be deleted from his DD Form 214 (Separation Document).

APPLICANT STATES: He received permission for a discharge from the Army National Guard, applied for enlistment in the Navy, sold his home and looked forwarded to serving with his wife, also a Navy member.  However, just prior to entering he was informed that the Navy would not waive the RE-3 reentry code. He also states that the entry concerning lost time should be deleted because he served his punishment and the entry continues to tarnish his record.  

In support of his application, he submitted an enlistment document, which shows he enlisted into the South Carolina Army National Guard on 31 October 1997 for a period of 3 years.

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

He enlisted in the Army on 6 October 1983, was trained as a unit supply specialist, achieved the rank of specialist four and served continuously until his discharge.

On 22 July 1988 he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being absent from his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to pay grade E-3.

On 25 August 1988 NJP was imposed against the applicant for being absent from his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to pay grade E-1.

His DD Form 214, dated 7 February 1990 indicates that he was discharged from the Army with 6 years, 3 months and 2 days of total active service under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 4, for expiration of his term of service.  His reentry codes are shown as 3B and 3C, and time lost is recorded as 7 – 8 March 1988 and 19 July – 18 August 1988.

AR 601-210, provides in pertinent part, that RE-3C applies to persons who have completed over 4 months of service who do not meet the basic eligibility pay grade requirements of AR 601-280, chapter 2.  Those persons are ineligible for enlistment unless a waiver is granted. 

The same regulation states that RE Code 3B is the code for lost time and is waiverable.

AR 601-280 provides, in pertinent part, that soldiers in grade of E-3 with more than 6 years, 29 days of service are not authorized reenlistment.  No grade waiver considered.

AR 635-5 provides, in pertinent part, that the dates of time lost during the current enlistment period will be entered in item number 29 of the DD Form 214.

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 records is in error or unjust.  

2.  The preparation of the applicant’s DD Form 214 was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

3. The Board empathizes with the applicant’s desire to join the Navy, but points out that reentry codes and the time lost entry is for the official use of the Army.  The Navy determines its own enlistment policies and may grant a waiver if they so wish.  The Board has no choice, but to deny the applicant’s request.

4.  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

___rvo  __  ___lds __  __bje____  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039587	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001017	
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.	100.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.