MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           14 MARCH 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001064000

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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 RE (Reenlistment Eligibility) Code “4” be changed to permit him to enlist in the Army National Guard.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he wants to enlist in the National Guard but cannot because of his RE Code.  He states that he received an honorable discharge and cannot understand why he has an RE-4 on his 1989 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  In support of his request he submits a copy of his separation report, a copy of his honorable discharge certificate, a completion certificate showing qualification as a state corrections officer, and letters of support from members of the New Hampshire Department of Corrections who note the applicant is a dedicated and hard working employee.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 23 July 1981.  By July 1983 he had been promoted to pay grade E-4 and awarded an Army Achievement Medal.  In 1984 he was awarded an Army Good Conduct Medal and in January 1985 he was awarded a second Army Achievement Medal.  In March 1985 he reenlisted for a period of 4 years.

On 11 June 1985 he departed AWOL (absent without leave).  He returned to military control on 17 June 1985 and was ultimately punished under Article 15 of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice).  His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-3.

He was promoted to pay grade E-4 in April 1986, was awarded a second Army Good Conduct Medal in 1987, and reenlisted for an additional 2 years on 
23 August 1988, after obtaining a waiver for his 1985 AWOL period.  In August 1988 he was awarded his third Army Achievement Medal.

On 5 December 1988 the applicant again departed AWOL.  He returned to military control on 9 December 1988 and was punished under Article 15 of the UCMJ.  His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-3.

In January 1989 the applicant’s unit commander initiated a local bar to reenlistment against him.  He cited the applicant’s 1988 UCMJ action, several counseling statements for failing to pay his debts, and a letter of reprimand for larceny, as the basis for the recommendation.  The local bar to reenlistment was approved on 17 January 1989 and the applicant elected not to appeal.

On 19 January 1989 the applicant voluntarily requested separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 16, stating that he did not feel he could overcome the basis for the bar to reenlistment.  His request was approved and on 27 January 1989 he was discharged with an honorable characterization of service.  Item 27 (Reenlistment Code), on his 
DD Form 214, reflects an RE Code of “4.”

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 prescribed basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE Codes, including RA RE Codes.

RE-4 applies to individuals who were separated from their last period of service with a non-waivable disqualification.  Soldiers who were separated from their term of service with a locally imposed bar to reenlistment in effect are ineligible for reenlistment and receive an RE-4.  Waiver requests are not permitted.  Additionally, soldiers separated in pay grade E-3 are not permitted to reenlist unless they are on an initial 2 year enlistment contract, or are required to meet a service remaining obligation, and then only if their new separation date would not exceed 6 years and 29 days.  The applicant had more than 7 years of service at the time of his separation.

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.  The evidence confirms that the applicant’s RE Code was assigned based on the fact that he was not qualified for continuous service at the time of his separation.  Not only did he have a local bar to reenlistment in effect at the time of his separation, he also exceeded the years of service permitted for reenlistment of individuals separated in pay grade E-3.  The applicant’s RE Code is appropriate considering the basis for his separation, and the Board finds no basis to correct the existing code.  The fact that he is unable to enlist in the National Guard is not sufficient justification to change the applicant’s RE Code.

2.  Contrary to the applicant’s contention, his RE Code is not a reflection on his honorable service, but rather merely reflects that he was not eligible to reenlist at the time of his separation from active duty because of a locally imposed bar to reenlistment and his grade at the time he was separated.

3.  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 that requirement.

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

__JHL___  __WTM     __RWA__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001064000	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020314	
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.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.