RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-04089
INDEX CODE:  110.02
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX			COUNSEL: NONE

	XXXXXXXXXXXXX				HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4D (senior airman or sergeant with at least nine years total active military service but fewer than sixteen years) be changed to enable her to reenter the military.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was unaware her RE code prevents her from reentry into military service.  She should be eligible for continued service.  If she is ineligible because she received separation pay, then she is willing to pay it back incrementally. 

The applicant provided no evidence in support of her appeal.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 2 November 1987, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 20 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of six years.  The applicant was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) effective and with the date of rank of 1 March 1995.

On 3 September 1996, the applicant received punishment under Article 15, UCMJ for dereliction of duty.  Her punishment consisted of reduction in grade to senior airman (SrA) with a new date of rank of 30 August 1996 and forfeiture of $250 pay per month for two months, suspended until 28 February 1997, after which time it was remitted without further action.  On 27 October 1996, the applicant received a referral enlisted performance report (EPR) for substandard duty performance. 

The applicant was honorably discharged effective 8 August 1998 with a separation code LCC (reduction in force) and a reentry code of 4D (senior airman or sergeant with at least nine years total active military service but fewer than sixteen years).  She received separation pay in the amount of $18,494.73.  She had served 10 years, 9 months and 7 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  Her RE code is correct and was properly given in accordance with proper Air Force authority.  Based on her grade as SrA, her high year of tenure (HYT) was established as 10 years total active federal military service (TAFMS).  In accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3606, Reenlistments in the United States Air Force, personnel not obtaining the grade of Staff Sergeant prior to HYT will be separated from the Air Force.  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant stated the Air Force Instruction mentioned in the Air Force advisory refers to personnel not obtaining the grade of SSgt.  She, in fact, was promoted to SSgt prior to her HYT.  While she acknowledges she made a mistake while maintaining an aircraft, she feels she has served her punishment and has learned her lesson.  She feels it was an oversight that she was not given an opportunity to earn her stripe back.  She wants her record changed so she can apply for a commission in the Coast Guard.  At age 36, she believes that she is now too old to be eligible for a commission in any branch of service, so the unjust RE Code in her records has served its purpose.  She would still like to see it changed for the principal of it.  The applicant’s review is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  It appears that the applicant’s RE code was properly assigned based on her circumstances at the time of her separation.  While it is true that she served honorably and well for the majority of her career, her RE code had its basis in the fact that she underwent demotion to the grade of SrA under Article 15, for the commission of offense punishable under the UCMJ.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing her commander abused his discretionary authority when he determined she had committed the offense for which punishment was imposed, that her rights were violated, or that the RE code she received was contrary to the provisions of the governing Air Force instruction.  We note that the applicant’s RE code is one that may be waived.  However, whether or not a waiver would be approved would be based on the needs of the service to which she applies.  Accordingly, in view of all the above and in the absence of persuasive evidence which would lead us to believe the applicant was the victim of an error or injustice, her request is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 28 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-04089 was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 19 Dec 02.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 Apr 03.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 03.
     Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 29 Apr 03.