RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2001-00666
		INDEX CODE:  100.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 4J, “Entered into Phase I of the Air Force Weight Program, or the unit commander has declared the airman ineligible to reenlist for a period of Phase II or probation,” be changed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The RE code 4J should have been changed putting her in a medical deferral status once she became pregnant.

In support of her appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement, a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, dated 15 Jul 99; a copy of DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, dated 7 Sep 99; a copy of a letter from HQ AFRS/RSO, dated 21 Feb 01, disapproving a moral eligibility determination.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Dec 96 in the grade of airman (E-2) for a period of four years.  On 15 Jul 99, she was released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve, by reason of “Pregnancy or childbirth,” and was issued an RE code of 4J.

On 16 Jul 99, she enlisted in the Air National Guard for a period of four years in the grade of airman first class (E-3).  On 14 Oct 00, she reenlisted in the Air National Guard for a period of two years in the grade of airman first class (E-3).

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt), with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 1 Jan 03.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAE reviewed this application and indicated that the RE code of 4J, “Entered into Phase I of the Air Force Weight Program, or the unit commander has declared the airman ineligible to reenlist for a period of Phase II or probation,” is correct.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Mar 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case.  At the time of the applicant’s release from active duty, she was furnished an RE Code predicated upon the quality of her service and the circumstances of her separation.  The assigned RE code of 4J accurately reflects that she was on the Weight Management Program when she separated.  After careful consideration of the evidence provided, we are not persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or that an upgrade of the RE code is warranted.  Furthermore, we note that the applicant’s current RE code of 4J is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided she meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program, and based on the needs of the service.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2001-00666 in Executive Session on 20 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 17 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Mar 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair