PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            13 March 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045487

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Antoinette Jones-Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman Jr.		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  That his reentry eligibility (RE) code of RE-4, be changed to RE-1 in order to allow him to reenlist.  

3.  In essence, that his record contains a locally imposed bar, which he claims should not make a service member permanently disqualified from reenlisting into the military service, unlike a Department of the Army (DA) bar to reenlistment, which would preclude his reenlistment.  He claims that while he was attempting to reenlist, this difference in the types of bar to reenlistment, was brought to his attention as an injustice or mistake by the recruiter.

4.  The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army for 
4 years, on 8 February 1984.  He was initially sent to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, where he received basic training and was then transferred to Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana for advanced training.  Upon completion of all required military training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 75B, (Personnel Administrative Specialist).  On 26 June 1984, he was further assigned to the 5th USA Artillery Group, Bueren, Germany.  On 8 July 1984, he was advanced to pay grade E-2, which was the highest pay grade he achieved.  On 
16 August 1984, he was transferred to the 52nd USA Artillery Detachment, Germany for permanent duty.

5.  On 26 October 1984, the applicant was officially notified of an impending bar to his reenlistment, his right to appeal, and possible separation action.  The applicant’s commander stated that the basis for the bar to reenlistment was due to a summarized nonjudicial punishment, under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for violation of Article 86 (absence from duty), and for six counselings dated 25 July, 15 August, 26 September, 12 October, 23 October and 25 October 1984.  All counselings were as a direct result of the applicant demonstrating a continual pattern of reporting late for duty.

6.  On 6 November 1984, he submitted a statement of rebuttal to the bar to reenlistment.  He acknowledged that he showed a lack of motivation in making formations on time for a period of two months, but also points out that he has noticeably improved in the past weeks and will continue to improve his punctuality for formations, appointments and for work call. 

7.  On 14 November 1984, the bar to reenlistment letter was approved under the provisions of paragraph 1-35c(2), Army Regulation 601-280, (Army Reenlistment Program).  Included within the letter was further guidance telling the applicant that: a signed copy of the bar would be placed in the his military personnel records jacket (MPRJ) and it would remain a permanent part of the 201 file; that the remarks “not recommended for further service” would be entered in the remarks section of the DA Form 2-1(Personnel Qualification Record); that he is barred from reenlistment, and that, provided his future performance and conduct warranted, the bar to reenlistment could be removed at any time; and that subsequent reviews for removal of the bar would be conducted every 3 months, as specified in paragraph 1-35d(1) and 1-35d(2), Army Regulation 601-280.

8.  On 15 February 1985, he was administratively attached to the 95th Chemical Company for rehabilitative purposes.  On 19 June 1985, while still attached to the 95th Chemical Company, he received a second review of his bar to reenlistment.  The review showed that he still continued to have problems with arriving to work on time and he also self referred himself to the Community Counseling Center, for marijuana abuse.  His commanding officer recommend that the bar remain in effect until such time as he straightened himself out or was discharged from the service.

9.  On 19 August 1985, he signed a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) in which he requested separation under the provisions of paragraph 16-5 (b), AR 635-200.  His chain of command recommended approval.  The following week the separation authority approved his discharge and directed the issuance of an honorable discharge.  

10.  On 26 August 1985, he was medically cleared by a separation physical for discharge.  

11.  On 13 September 1985, the applicant was separated with an honorable discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, by reason of a locally imposed bar to reenlistment with a separation code of KGF.  He had 1 year, 7 months and 6 days of creditable active service, with no lost time.  He received an RE code of RE-4.  

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by changes in service obligations.  Paragraph 16-5 applies to personnel denied reenlistment and provides that soldiers who receive DA imposed or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they will be unable to overcome the bar may apply for immediate discharge.  Incident to the request the member must state that he understands that recoupment of unearned portions of any enlistment or reenlistment bonus is required and that later reenlistment is not permitted.

13.  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 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.  

14.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have a local bar to reenlistment with less than 18 years of service will be assigned an RE code of RE-3D.  Persons with a Department of the Army imposed bar to reenlistment will be assigned an RE code of RE-4, which is a nonwaivable disqualification for reenlistment.  An RE code of 1 would indicate that the former soldier is eligible for immediate reenlistment, without a waiver. 

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board has carefully reviewed the applicant’s records and finds no basis for assignment of an RE code of RE-4 in this case.  The applicant’s reason for separation was due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  Therefore, his RE code should have been an RE code of RE-3D, not RE-4.   

2.  This change will thereby permit him to apply for reenlistment in the RA provided he is otherwise medically and morally qualified for reenlistment and meets the needs of the service.

3.  Since he requires a waiver to reenlist, an RE code of RE-1 is not appropriate.

4.  In view of the foregoing the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing to the individual concerned a DD Form 215, (Correction to DD Form 214), to show that item 27 of the DD Form 214 issued to him on 13 September 1985 to read RE-3D instead of RE-4.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jh____  __dph ___  __jtm ___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		     ___June Hajjar____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR200044643	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010313	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19850913	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200 	
DISCHARGE REASON	Chapter 16	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DASA	
ISSUES         1.	A100.03	
2.	A100.06	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.