RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        27 January
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004106838


      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             |
|     |Mr. David S. Griffin              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond J. Wagner             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast         |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Brenda K. Koch                |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that her reentry eligibility code
(RE) be changed from RE-4 to RE-1.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there are no adverse actions in
her record and that the RE-4 was a mistake done in haste.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her Honorable Discharge Certificate; a
copy of the orders that reassigned her to the U.S. Army Transition Point at
Fort Hood, Texas; and a copy of her DD Form 293 (Application for the Review
of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error, which
occurred on 17 April 1992.  The application submitted in this case is dated
5 April 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant initially entered active Army service on 8 December 1981.
 She reenlisted on 9 October 1984 and on 18 April 1988.

4.  The applicant was assigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters
Detachment, 115th Forward Support Battalion (FSB) of the 1st Cavalry
Division at Fort Hood, Texas.

5.  On 25 July 1991, the applicant's commander formally counseled her
concerning her deficiencies in performing her duties as a squad leader.

6.  On 18 September 1991, the applicant's commander formally counseled her
concerning his intent and reason for requesting that she receive a bar to
reenlistment.  The applicant's commander stated that he was recommending
placing a bar to reenlistment on the applicant because she had
consecutively failed two Skill Qualification Tests (SQT).

7.  On 30 September 1991, the applicant's commander initiated a Bar to
Reenlistment Certificate, recommending that the applicant be barred from
reenlistment.

8.  On 30 September 1991, the applicant acknowledged that she had received
a copy of the Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, she was advised of the basis
for the action, and she stated that she did desire to submit a statement.

9.  On 7 October 1991, the Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, with the
applicant's statement, was forwarded to the commanding general of the 1st
Cavalry Division and on 15 November 1991, the commanding general approved
the recommendation to bar the applicant from reenlistment.

10.  On 27 January 1992, the applicant's bar to reenlistment was reviewed
and not recommended for removal.  The appropriate entry was made on the
applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record).

11.  On 17 April 1992, the applicant was discharged by reason of expiration
of term of service characterized as honorable and assigned a reenlistment
code of RE-4.

12.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Total Army Retention Program) prescribes
procedures to deny reenlistment to Soldiers whose immediate separation
under administrative procedures is not warranted but whose reentry into, or
service beyond ETS with the Active Army is not in the best interest of the
military service. When discharge under administrative procedures is not
warranted, action will be taken to bar untrainable Soldiers from further
service with the Regular Army.  These Soldiers are often identified by
failure to perform the basic tasks required of their primary MOS, failure
to achieve individual weapons qualification, failure of the Army’s Physical
Fitness Test, failure of the skill qualification test, and similar reasons.
 Frequently, Soldiers will meet the minimum standards for their present
grade but obviously lack the potential to become the supervisor or senior
technician of the future.

13.  Army Regulation 601-280 further provides that the proper unit
commander will review approved bars to reenlistment at least three months
after the date of approval.  If the commander feels the bar to reenlistment
should remain, the entry "Bar to Reenlistment reviewed; not recommended for
removal, (date)" will be made on the Soldier's DA Form 2-1.

14.  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
(Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program) covers eligibility
criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the
Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.

15.  Table 3-6 of Army Regulation 601-210, then in effect, states that RE-1
applies to persons completing an initial term of active service who were
fully qualified for continued Army service when last separated.

16.  Table 3-6 of Army Regulation 601-210, then in effect, states that RE-3
applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the
disqualification is waivable.

17.  Table 4-1 of Army Regulation 601-210, then in effect, lists waivable
moral and administrative disqualifications.  Line AC of Table 4-1 lists a
bar to reenlistment as a waivable disqualification.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that her RE code should be changed from RE-4 to
RE-1.  She further contends that there are no adverse actions in her record
and that the RE-4 was a mistake done in haste.

2.  The applicant's record contained a locally imposed Bar to Reenlistment
Certificate at the time of her discharge.  Therefore, the evidence of
record does not support the applicant's contention.

3.  The records contain no indication of procedural or other errors that
would tend to jeopardize the applicant's rights in the processing and the
review of the bar to reenlistment.

4.  RE-1 applies to persons completing an initial term of active service
who were fully qualified for continued Army Service when last separated.
The applicant was not completing an initial term of enlistment and she was
not fully qualified for reenlistment.  Therefore, the applicant is not
entitled to receive a RE-1.

5.  The applicant had a locally imposed Bar to Reenlistment Certificate in
effect at the time of her discharge.  Therefore, the applicant should have
been assigned a RE-3 in accordance with Army Regulations.





BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF

___ecp__  ___pkk__  ____rjw__ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________ DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the applicant
was assigned a reentry eligibility code of RE-3 instead of RE-4.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
the applicant's request for reentry eligibility code of RE-1.





                                  _____Raymond J. Wagner_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040000781                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050127                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |PARTIAL GRANT                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]