RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        16 August 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070004655


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. William D. Powers             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William Blakely               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald L. Lewy                |     |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 (RE)
code be changed from RE-4 to RE-1.

2.  The applicant states that she is trying to join the Tennessee National
Guard and needs her RE code changed as soon as possible.  She states that
she believes that the RE code that she was furnished may have been a
typographical error.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of his
application.

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.  On 20 June 1981, she enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR),
under the Delayed Entry Program, for 6 years, in the pay grade of E-1.  She
enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years on 28 December 1981 and she
successfully completed her training as a medical specialist.  She was
advanced to the pay grade of E-2 on 1 August 1982; to the pay grade of E-3
on 1 November 1982; and to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 September 1983.

3.  The applicant remained on active duty through a series of reenlistments
and extensions and she was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 May 1991.

4.  The available records indicate that the applicant reenlisted in the
USAR on
6 July 1993 while she was still a member of the RA.  She was honorably
discharged from the RA on 30 August 1993, under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, upon completion of her required service.
Her Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214)
shows that she was assigned an RE-4 code.  Her DD Form 214 also shows that
at the time of her discharge, she was entitled to separation pay.

5.  Army Regulation 601-210 provides the guidance for the issuance of RE
codes upon separation from active duty.  It states, in pertinent part, that
these codes are not to be considered derogatory in nature, they are simply
codes that are used for identification of an enlistment processing
procedure.

6.  An RE-3 applies to persons who are not considered fully qualified for
reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but the
disqualification is waivable.  A local or self-imposed bar to reenlistment
or reaching the maximum years of service for one’s grade are some of those
instances in which a person would be issued a code of RE-3 at the time of
separation.  RE-4 applies to persons with a
non-waivable disqualification.

7.  Army Regulation 601-280, in effect at the time, provides the criteria
for reenlistment eligibility and establishes the maximum number of years
persons may serve on active duty in a particular grade.  At the time that
the applicant served in the Army, the Retention Control Point (RCP)
established for the pay grade of E-5 was 13 years of maximum service.
Personnel who were unable to reenlist for a minimum reenlistment period of
2 years in order to reach the maximum RCP for their grade were, in effect,
barred from reenlistment.  Personnel who fall in this category are not
required to extend their enlistment to their maximum RCP in order to
receive their full entitlement to separation pay.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It appears that an error was made during the preparation of the DD Form
214 which resulted in the incorrect RE code being annotated.

2.  The applicant was barred from reenlistment at the time of her
separation and was not fully qualified for reenlistment due to her having
reached the maximum RCP for her grade.  Accordingly, in accordance with the
applicable regulation, she should have been furnished an RE-3 code.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted.  She was discharged upon
completion of her required service.  He had reached her RCP and she was
ineligible for reenlistment as a result of completing 11 years, 8 months
and 3 days of net active service and serving in the pay grade of E-5.
Therefore, the RE-4 code that she was assigned was in error and her DD Form
214 should be corrected to reflect the appropriate RE code.

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would now be appropriate to correct the
applicant's records as recommended below.

BOARD VOTE:

__DLL___  __WDP__  __WB___  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
amending her DD Form 214 to show that she was assigned an RE-3 code instead
of an RE-4 code as currently reflected.




                                  ___William D. Powers__
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070004655                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070816                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000/ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS         |
|2.  4                   |100.0300/CHANGE REENLISTMENT CODE       |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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