| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member |
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
| 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. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609487C070209
Also, he requests correction of his records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow enlistment. The U.S. Army Enlistment Eligibility Activity (USAEEA), in a comment, opined that the reentry code RE-3C is correct as shown on the applicants DD Form 214 in accordance with table 3-6, Army Regulation 601-210, dated 14 February 1990. The reentry code of RE-3C applies to persons who have completed more than 4 months service who do not meet the basic eligibility pay grade...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010415
On 23 November 1988, the applicant's immediate commander reviewed the applicant's statement and still recommended the applicant be barred. On 1 December 1989, the applicant's immediate commander reviewed the bar to reenlistment and recommended it remain in place. c. Although it is clear that the applicant neither completed the period of active service he enlisted for nor completed his 8-year statutory military service obligations, the determination of eligibility for MGIB benefits is not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073076C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. 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 | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017497
The applicant requests correction of his separation code and narrative reason for separation so he may reenter military service. On 24 July 1989, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct abuse of illegal drugs and directed he be furnished a general discharge. The evidence of record confirms the applicants narrative reason for separation and his SPD code were assigned based on the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005058
The applicant requests: * reconsideration of ABCMR denial to remove his non-judicial punishment (NJP) of 4 September 1991and restore his rank and privileges * removal of his local bar to reenlistment and his request to be discharged be rescinded * change his separation program designator (SPD) and reentry eligibility (RE) code to reflect other than local bar to reenlistment * add the Army Achievement Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017394
A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 13 March 1990, shows the applicant voluntarily requested discharge from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 16, due to a bar to reenlistment. The regulation in effect at the time stated the reason for discharge based on separation code "KGF" was "[Headquarters, Department of the Army]-imposed bar to reenlistment or locally-imposed bar to reenlistment" and the regulatory authority was Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03094859C070212
Army Regulation 635-5-1 prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. 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. The fact that the applicant was permitted to enlist...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510032C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. The bar to reenlistment was based on the applicants record of service, his duty performance and future potential for retention in the Army. On 11 April 1989, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-5, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5, (HQDA Imposed Bar To Reenlistment) with an honorable character of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084214C070212
He further states that he feels it unjust that he did not receive separation pay that other soldiers received who accepted early discharges during the draw-down and believes he should have been discharged in the pay grade of E-4, for the convenience of the government, with entitlement to compensation for his service. Chapter 6 of that regulation provides for barring from reenlistment individuals whose continued active duty is not in the best interest of the military service. It states, in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609758aC070209
On 20 August 1987, he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-4, for 3 years. He indicated that he would not appeal the bar to reenlistment. On 11 August 1993, the commander indicated that he would not submit a separate appeal on behalf of the applicant.