RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS.


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01562

  					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from 3A (First 
Term Airman separating before 36 months; or 1st term, no prior 
service; females learning of pregnancy prior to enlistment) to a 
1-series code (a person is eligible for immediate reenlistment 
or prior service enlistment, provided otherwise eligible). 


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was a good airman and would like to reenlist, however; she 
had no idea she would be coded ineligible to do so.  She should 
not be denied the right to reenlist since she did not receive a 
dishonorable discharge nor was she force separated.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 12 May 09, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.

According to DD Form 2648, Preseparation Counseling Checklist 
for AC, AGR, AR, FTS, and RPA Service Members, section IV – 
Remarks, dated 6 Sep 12, the applicant indicated she was 
separating voluntarily through pregnancy.    

On 17 Dec 12, the applicant received an honorable discharge with 
Reentry code 3A and narrative reason for separation as pregnancy 
or childbirth.  She was credited with 3 years, 7 months, and 6 
days of active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice with respect to the applicant’s RE code.  
The applicant applied for and was granted early separation under 
pregnancy guidance.  Every first-term airman who enlisted for 
six years and separated before completing five years of service 
for any reason and who has no known disqualifying factors or 
ineligibility conditions except grade, skill level, or 
insufficient Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS) 
receives an RE code of 3A.  Any branch of service can waive the 
RE code if they otherwise want to enlist the applicant.  She is 
asking for a 1-series RE code, however; AFI 36-2606, 
Reenlistment in the USAF, chapter 5 states not to separate 
members in the RE code 1-series except for 1J – Eligible to 
reenlist, but elects separation.  All Airmen selected under the 
Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP) who elect separation are 
given the RE code 1J.  The applicant did not meet the basic 
requirements to be selected for reenlistment.      

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 3 Jun 15 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  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 an error or injustice regarding the 
applicant’s request for change to her RE code.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case, however, the we found no errors in the discharge 
processing, no evidence that she was denied rights to which she 
was entitled and it appears the RE code assigned is appropriate 
and correct.  We agree with the Air Force OPR and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the requested relief.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

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


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2015-01562 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Apr 15.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 3 Jun 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Sep 15.