RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         8 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004221


      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             |
|     |Ms. Yvonne Foskey                 |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Diane J. Armstrong            |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Delia R. Trimble              |     |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, correction of the reentry (RE) code
entered in Item 26 (Reenlistment Eligibility) of her 14 June 2003
separation document (NGB Form 22).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that after her unit was activated for
deployment, she requested to be honorably discharged based on having to
care for her 7 year old daughter.  She states she has recently attempted to
reenlist and was told by the recruiter she would not be able to re-enlist
based on her
RE-4 code.  She further states that it was her belief that her discharge
would have no negative impact on her future ability to serve.  She also
states that she did not receive proper counseling on the explanation of
terms entered on his separation document, and as a result, she did not
understand the impact of the RE-4 code she received.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of her
application:  Self-Authored Letter; Third Party Letter; Separation Document
(NGB Form 22); Fax Cover Sheet, dated 3 September 2005; United States Army
Reserve (USAR) Personnel Command Orders Number D-05-028314, dated 23 May
2000; Personnel Action (DA Form 4187), dated 14 June 2003; and Bar to
Reenlistment, Immediate Reenlistment or Extension Certificate (NGB Form 602-
R), dated
14 June 2003.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record shows she enlisted in the Iowa Army National
Guard (IAARNG) on 21 May 1992.  She was trained in, awarded and served in
military occupational specialty (MOS) 92G (Food Service Specialist), and
the highest rank she attained was specialist/E-4 (SPC/E-4).

2.  On 15 May 2002, the applicant was placed on active duty for the purpose
of deployment.

3.  On 14 June 2003, the applicant's commander recommended the applicant be
barred from reenlistment for non-completion of her Family Care Plan, and
for her refusal to receive the required immunizations.

4.  On 14 June 2003, the applicant was discharged from the IAARNG under the
provisions of paragraph 8-26i, National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, by
reason of expiration of term of service (ETS).  At the time, the applicant
held the rank of SP4/E-4, and had completed a total of 5 years, 6 months,
and 24 days of service for retired pay.

5.  The NGB Form 22 issued to the applicant on the date of her discharge,
14 June 2003, confirms she received an honorable conditions discharge (HD)
and that based on the authority for her discharge, she was assigned a
reenlistment eligibility code of RE-4.

6.  NGR 600-200 establishes standards, policies and procedures for the
management of enlisted ARNG soldiers.  Chapter 8 contains policies and
procedures for the separation/discharge of enlisted personnel from the
ARNG.  Paragraph 8-26 provides the procedures for discharging members from
the State ARNG and/or from the Reserve of the Army.  Paragraph 8-26i
contains guidance on separating members if an approved bar to reenlistment
or extension is in effect, or the soldier is ineligible for extension due
to overweight, APFT failure, or a positive urinalysis, but is not barred at
time of ETS.  It further stipulates that members separating under this
provision of the regulation will be assigned an eligibility code of RE-3.
Table 8-1 contains the applicable definitions for
RE codes.  It states, in pertinent part, that RE-3 applies to members whose
disqualification allows for eligibility for reenlistment with a waiver.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for upgrade of her RE code was carefully
considered and found to have merit.

2.  By regulation, members separated by reason of bar to enlistment (ETS)
are assigned an RE code of RE-3.  The evidence of record shows she was
erroneously assigned an RE-4 code.  Therefore, the applicant’s state Army
National Guard records and the Department of the Army records of the
individual concerned should be corrected by showing she was assigned an RE-
3 code on her 14 June 2003 NGB Form 22.

3.  Based on the authority and reason for the applicant’s discharge, it
would not be appropriate to upgrade her eligibility code to RE-1 as she
requests.  The reason for her discharge does support an RE-3 code, which
would only allow for reenlistment with a waiver approved by the proper
authority based on the needs of the Army.

4.  The applicant is advised that although no further change to her RE code
is recommended, this does not mean she is being denied reenlistment.  While
RE-3 does apply to persons who are not considered fully qualified for
reentry or continuous service; there are provisions that provide for a
waiver of the disqualification.  If she desires to reenlist, she should
contact a local recruiter to determine her eligibility.  Those individuals
can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the
time and are required to process RE code waivers.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___SK __  ___DJA  _  __DRT _  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.  As a result, the Board
recommends that the state Army National Guard records and the Department of
the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected, as appropriate,
by amending her
14 June 2003 NGB Form 22 by deleting the current entry in Item 26
(Reenlistment Eligibility) and replacing it with the entry “RE-3”; and by
providing her a correction to her separation document that reflects this
change.

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
upgrading her RE code to RE-1.




                                  ____Stanley Kelley_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004221                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005-11-08                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |2003/06/14                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |NGR AR 600-200 . . . . .                |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS (Bar to reenlistment)               |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |110                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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