IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  2 October 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080009581 


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, in effect, that her reentry (RE) code of RE-4 be changed to RE-1.   

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was married and became pregnant and as a result was discharged and assigned an RE code of RE-4.  She states that women have since not received a code of RE-4 even if they are pregnant and not married, and she should not have a code of RE-4 when women now do not. 

3.  The applicant provides her separation document (DD Form 214) in support of her 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.  The applicant's record shows she enlisted in the Woman's Army Corp (WAC) and entered active duty on 25 November 1964.  She held and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 71H (Personnel Specialist), and specialist four (SP4) was the highest rank she attained while serving on active duty.   

3.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that upon completion of training, she was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas, where she arrived for duty on 16 July 1965.  

4.  On 21 February 1966, the Chief, OB-GYN Clinic, Fort Riley, Kansas, certified that the applicant was pregnant.

5.  On 9 March 1966, the applicant requested to be discharged under the provisions of Section III, Army Regulation 635-210 on or about 18 March 1966.  Her unit commander recommended approval and indicated her conduct and efficiency ratings were "Excellent".  

6.  On 17 March 1966, the applicant's discharge was approved and on 28 March 1966, she was honorably discharged accordingly, after completing a total of 
1 year, 4 months, and 4 days of active military service.  The separation document (DD Form 214) she received shows she was separated under the provisions of Section III, Army Regulation 635-210, and that she was assigned a Separation Program Number (SPN) of 221, and an RE code of RE-4.  

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It also establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The version of the regulation in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge stipulated that the SPN 221 would be assigned to members separated under the provisions of Section III, Army regulation 635-210, by reason of pregnancy, and that members who were discharged for this reason were not eligible for reenlistment.  The regulation provided no provisions for waiver of the disqualification and therefore authorized the assignment of RE-4.  

8.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the United States Army Reserve (USAR).  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes 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 persons who have a nonwaivable disqualification.  RE-3 applies to persons who have a waivable disqualification.  

9.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the current policy related to the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the Separation Program Designator (SPD) (Previously SPN) code to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code MDF is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated for pregnancy.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table stipulates that a code of  RE-3 will be assigned to members separated under these provisions with an SPD code of MDF.   

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the code of RE-4 she was assigned upon her discharge should be changed to a code of RE-1 was carefully considered, and although the applicant was properly assigned a code of RE-4 based on the authority and reason for her discharge based on the policies in effect at the time, partial equity relief is warranted under current standards.  

2.  Under current regulatory policy, members separated by reason of pregnancy are assigned a code of RE-3, which applies to persons who are disqualified from reenlistment but the disqualification is waivable.  As a result, it would be appropriate and serve the interest of equity to correct the applicant's record to show she was assigned a code of RE-3.  The applicant is advised that if she wants to enlist in the Regular Army or a Reserve Component (RC) of the Army, 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 waivers of RE codes. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  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 all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing she was assigned an RE code of RE-3; and by providing her a correction to her separation document that includes 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 changing her RE code to 
RE-1.  




      _______ 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)                                         AR20080009581



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080009581



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1