IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 June 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110025176 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 reentry (RE) code be changed from RE-4 to RE-3. 2. The applicant states he was really immature and made a bad decision. He was on leave, missed his flight and was so humiliated at the prospect of returning late that he did not return at all. He thinks that the Army was better off without the person he was then. However, he has matured and has come to understand and respect the Army's core values. An RE-3 would permit him to apply for a waiver to reenlist, then the Army could decide whether his post-service growth and experience warrant another chance. 3. The applicant provides copies of his discharge orders, his pre-separation counseling checklist, and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). 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 28 November 2005. He was married, 18 years old, and had a high school education. He never completed his military training. 3. He was absent without leave from 3 January 2006 to 25 July 2006. When court-martial charges were preferred for that offense he consulted with counsel and he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He indicated he understood the elements of the charges against him and admitted he was guilty of at least one offense or of a lesser-included offense for which a punitive discharge was authorized. He acknowledged he would receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions. He also understood he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits and he might be ineligible for veterans' benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. He stated he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of this discharge. 4. The separation authority approved the request and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions. 5. On 8 October 2006, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He was assigned a separation program designation (SPD) code of "KFS" and an "RE-4." 6. Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate 7. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD Code of "KFS" was the appropriate code for an enlisted person discharged under chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635.200. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table establishes an RE code of "4" as the proper code to assign such individuals. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The RE code was properly assigned. 2. The applicant never completed his initial training. His unsupported assertion that he has matured is insufficient justification for changing his RE code. 3. 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 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) AR20110025176 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110025176 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORreCTION OF MILITARY reCORDS reCORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1