RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02562
		INDEX CODE:  

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4E be changed and her DD Form 214 reflect she was released from active duty and transferred to the inactive reserve.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her original contract placed her in inactive Reserve duty for four years after separation.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 May 1998 for a period of four years.  She was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class.  She received three enlisted performance reports (EPRs) closing 19 January 2000, 19 January 2001 (referral), and 19 January 2002, of which the over all evaluations were “4."

On 10 May 2002, applicant was notified by her commander that her promotion to senior airman was being withheld because she had been placed in the Air Force Weight and Body Fat Management Program.

On 19 July 2002, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service) with an honorable discharge.  She was assigned a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4E (Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months (55 months for 6-year enlistees), if a first-term airman; or, grade is airman first class or below and the airman is a second-term or career airman).  He served a total of four years and two months active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE states there was nothing to support the course of action requested by the applicant.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS states based on the fact applicant was serving in the grade of airman first class and had completed over 31 months of active duty,   she was ineligible to reenlist or extend her enlistment.  Her expiration term of service (ETS) was 19 July 2002 and effective that date she received a voluntary honorable discharge.  She was serving under the Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP) at the time of her discharge.  Her separation program designator was established as KBK (Expiration Term of Service) and her reenlistment eligibility code was established as 4E, which are correct.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 15 October 2004, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant for review and response 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 timely filed.

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; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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 this application in Executive Session on 6 January 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 04, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 4 Oct 04.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Oct 04, w/atch.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Oct 04.