MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            28 January 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12483
                                              AR1998012665

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Judy L. Blanchard		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert W. Garrett		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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: In effect, that her discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.  She also requested a release of the bar to reenlistment. 

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she was told the bar was temporary for
2 years.  She further states that if she had known this was not true, she would not have agreed to the bar to reenlistment.

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

On 16 February 1981, the applicant enlisted into the Regular Army for 3 years.  She completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91B10 (Medical Specialist).  Her service was continuous through extensions and reenlistment.  On 1 September 1987, the applicant reenlisted for 3 years.  The highest grade she achieved was pay grade E-5. 

Between May 1988 and April 1989, the applicant was counseled on 15 different occasions for leaving her appointed place of duty without proper authority; for writing bad checks; for unsatisfactory duty performance; for disobeying lawful orders, for dereliction in the performance of her duties and for socializing/fraternizing with a junior soldier.

On 28 September 1989, the commander notified the applicant that she was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  The commander’s recommendation was based on the applicant’s unsatisfactory duty performance; her indebtedness and action, which indicates that she, could not be rehabilitated for productive military service.  The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to her, she waived consideration, personal appearance, and representation before a board of officers.

On 31 October 1989, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, waived consideration of her case by an administrative board contingent upon her receiving a general discharge.  The applicant did not submit a statement in her own behalf.   

On 1 November 1989, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the issuance of a general discharge.  On 4 January 1990, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-5, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13 (unsatisfactory performance) with a general discharge.  She had completed 7 years, 10 months and 19 days of creditable active service.  She was awarded the Good Conduct Medal, the Army Service Ribbon and the Overseas Service Ribbon.  She was given a reentry code of 
RE-3.

Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.  They are required to process a request for waiver under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program).  Therefore, since enlistment criteria does change, and since you have the right to apply for a waiver, it is suggested that you periodically visit your local recruiting station to determine if you should apply for a waiver.

Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US 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.

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have received nonjudicial punishment are so disqualified, as are persons with bars to reenlistment, and those discharged under the provisions of chapters 9, 10, 13, and 14 of Army Regulation 635-200.

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.  The applicant states, that she was barred from reenlistment.  There is no evidence in her military, which indicates that she was barred from reenlistment.  However, if the applicant is referring to the assigned reentry code (RE-3).  The Regulation requires that at the time of discharge reentry codes will be assigned based on the service records and the reason for the discharge.  The applicant’s records support the assignment of RE code 3.

3.  Therefore, there is no basis for removal of the RE code from the applicant's record.  The disqualification upon which the code was based, however, can be waived for reenlistment purposes. 

4.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the assigned reentry eligibility code was and still is appropriate. 

5.  Therefore in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requests.

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

__LLS___  __RWG___  __CLG___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12483/AR1998012665	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990128	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19900104	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, CHAP 13	
DISCHARGE REASON	A49.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.