IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 November 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120008450 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 to change her reentry eligibility (RE) code to a more favorable RE code. 2. The applicant states she received numerous awards and had no record of adverse action or negative counseling. Upon her discharge from Fort Stewart, GA, she was never told about the code or its meaning. 3. The applicant provides a copy of her 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 (RA) on 24 November 1993. She completed training and she was awarded military occupational specialty 68W (Health Care Specialist). The highest rank/grade she attained while serving on active duty was staff sergeant/E-6. 3. Her DD Form 214 shows that on 25 April 2007, she was honorably discharged after completing 13 years, 5 months, and 2 days of creditable service. This form also contains the following pertinent information: * Block 24 shows her service was characterized as honorable * Block 25 shows she was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-8 * Block 26 shows her Separation Program Designator (SPD) code as JDG * Block 27 shows she was assigned an RE code of 3 * Block 28 shows her narrative reason for separation was "Parenthood" 4. Paragraph 5-8 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) states, Soldiers will be considered for involuntary separation when parental obligations interfere with fulfillment of military responsibilities. 5. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation, provided the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It stated, in pertinent part, that the SPD code of JDG was the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-8, for "Parenthood." 6. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table indicates that an RE code of 3 was the proper code to assign members separated with an SPD code of JDG at the time of the applicant's discharge. 7. Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the RA and the United States Army Reserve. Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes the basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. This chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes: a. RE code 1 applies to persons who are considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the time of separation. b. RE code 3 applies to persons who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the time of separation, but the disqualification is waivable. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contention that her RE code should be upgraded was carefully considered and determined to lack merit. 2. Her DD Form 214 clearly shows she was honorably discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-8, with a narrative reason for separation of "Parenthood." 3. The evidence shows she was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3 based on her narrative reason for separation and her SPD code. Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief. Additionally, she is advised that an RE code of 3 does not indicate she had any adverse actions during her period of service. 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) AR20120008450 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120008450 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1