RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02351

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of 4A (separated for hardship or dependency reasons) be upgraded to 1J (eligible to reenlist, but elects separation).

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge for financial hardship, he was eligible to reenlist, but voluntarily separated from active duty.  Since his discharge, his financial hardship no longer exists due to divorce, bankruptcy, and family assistance from his parents.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits extracts from his military records, a copy of his bankruptcy discharge order, and divorce decree.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 4 June 1986 and entered active duty.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5).

On 24 October 1995, the applicant reenlisted in the Air Force for a period of 6 years.

A Report of Individual Personnel (RIP), prepared on the applicant on 17 March 1998, indicates that on 1 December 1997, he was placed in a self-directed fitness improvement program.

In a memorandum, dated 2 March 1998, the applicant requested voluntary separation with an honorable discharge based on financial hardship.
The separation authority approved the applicant’s separation request on 12 March 1998.

On 20 March 1998, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Hardship) and issued an RE Code of 4A (separated for hardship or dependency reasons).  He completed 11 years, 9 months, and 17 days of active service, with 1 month and 23 days of prior inactive service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, the RE Code the applicant received at the time of his separation is correct.  He has not satisfactorily indicated the RE Code was inappropriate or not in compliance with Air Force policy.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 18 October 2002 for review and response within 30 days.  However, as of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.	The Secretary of the Air Force has statutory authority to promulgate rules and regulations governing the administration of the Air Force.  In the exercise of that authority, he has determined that members separated from the Air Force would be furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation.  At the time an RE code is assigned, it reflects the Air Force position regarding whether or not, or under what circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.  In this case, the applicant was given an RE code that bars reenlistment without first obtaining a waiver.  There has been no showing that the Secretary abused this discretionary authority or that the particular RE code assigned was contrary to the prevailing directive.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2002-02351 in Executive Session on 13 February 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jul 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 8 Aug 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 Oct 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Oct 02.