RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02151
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED: No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect:

         a.  Block 14 add US Army Jumpmaster School

         b.  Block 26 - Separation Program Designator (SPD) code “LLC”
be removed.

         c.  Block 27 - Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be  changed
from a “4D” to “1A.”

EXAMINER’S NOTE: The applicant’s record has been      administratively
corrected to add an Air Force Achievement  Medal  and  the  Jumpmaster
Course.  Therefore, the only issues to be considered by the Board  are
the SPD and RE Codes.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The narrative reason for separation was “Reduction in Force”  but  his
separation and reenlistment codes make reference to High  Year  Tenure
(HYT).  At the time of  his  involuntary  separation,  his  Air  Force
Specialty Code (AFSC) was exempt from HYT due the critical shortage in
the career field.

AFI 36-3208, Section 10.1.3 states:  “SrA (E-4) and below who fail  to
progress to SSgt (E-5) are separated upon reaching 12 years  of  Total
Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS).”  Block 12 of his DD Form 214
indicates he had 10 years and 2 days of TAFMS.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 January  1985  for  a
period of four years as an  airman  basic.   He  served  as  a  Combat
Controller and was progressively promoted to sergeant (Sgt).

On 5 August 1994, the applicant requested separation under the Special
Separation Benefit for Fiscal Year (FY) 1995 with a separation date of
4 January 1995.  As of the date of his application to separate, he had
served nine years, seven months and two days on active duty.

The applicant was honorably separated on  5  January  1995  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Involuntary separation due to reduction  in
force.)  He served 10 years and 2 days of  active  duty  service.   He
received an RE code of “4D” which means "Grade  is  Senior  Airman  or
Sergeant, completed at least 9 years’ TAFMS, but fewer than 16  years’
TAFMS, and has not been selected for promotion to staff sergeant.   He
received a Separation Program Designator (SPD)  code  of  “LCC”  which
indicates the applicant was involuntarily  separated  -  reduction  in
force.  His application for early involuntary separation was  approved
with separation pay.  He received full separation pay in the amount of
$23,198.40.

EXAMINER’S  NOTE:   The  applicant’s  DD  Form  214  reflects  he  was
discharged from active duty; however, he was released from active duty
and transferred to the Reserve the Air Force.  AFPC/DPPRR has  advised
that the applicant’s records will  be  administratively  corrected  to
reflect this information.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS states AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in  the  United  States
Air Force, airmen in the grade of SrA and Sgt may not reenlist if  the
new date of separation (DOS) will exceed the  year  and  month  during
which they will complete 10 years TAFMS.  The effective  date  of  the
applicant’s DOS was 5 January 1995; he had served 10 years and 2  days
of active duty.

The applicant stated in his application that SrA and below who  failed
to progress to SSgt were separated upon reaching 12  years  of  TAFMS.
This HYT policy was established by Military  Personnel  Flight  Letter
(MPFL) 95-37, dated 7 June 1995.  The policy states E-4s authorized to
receive a Selective Reenlist Bonus (SRB) and who had  less  than  nine
years of service were allowed to reenlist up to a maximum of 12  years
of service if they received a bonus.  If they were  not  selected  for
promotion  to  SSgt,  they  were  separated  upon  completion  of  the
enlistment contract.  E-4s who reenlisted with a DOS beyond  12  years
of service and collected an  SRB  must  separate  on  the  month  they
reached 12 years TAFMS if not selected to SSgt.  The applicant was not
eligible to participate in the new HYT program  for  E-4s  because  he
separated from active duty prior to the implementation of the new  HYT
program.

AFPC/DPPRS upon reviewing the documents provided by the applicant  and
his  military  personnel  records  determined  the  reenlistment   and
separation code he received are correct.  However,  if  the  applicant
wishes to reenter the military, the respective service may  waive  his
reenlistment eligibility code based on their recruiting needs  at  the
time of his application for enlistment.

AFPC/DPPRS further states the applicant has not submitted any evidence
nor  identified  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in   the
processing of his discharge.  Based  upon  the  documentation  in  the
applicant's file, they believe his discharge was consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge  regulations.
Also, the applicant has not provided any facts to warrant a change  in
his RE or SPD code.  Therefore, based on the information and  evidence
provided, they recommend the applicant's request be denied.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
27 August 2004, for review and response.  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.  As noted, the Air Force verified
the applicant’s entitlement to the Air Force  Achievement  Medal  with
one Oak Leaf Cluster and completion of Jumpmaster School; therefore  a
DD Form 215 has been issued to add these to his records.  Further, the
Board has been advised administrative corrections will be accomplished
to reflect the applicant was released from active duty and transferred
to the Air Force Reserve.  However, with regard to the issues  of  his
SPD and RE codes,  the  Board,  after  careful  consideration  of  the
circumstances of this case and the evidence provided by the applicant,
is not persuaded  the  discharge  action  and  resulting  reenlistment
eligibility and  separation  codes  were  in  error  or  unjust.   The
applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, the Board agrees with
the opinions and recommendations of the Air  Force  and  adopts  their
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of  an  error  or  injustice.   We  further  note  the
applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code “4D” is  a  waiverable  code
and if he wishes to reenter military service, the  respective  service
may waive the RE code depending  upon  the  recruiting  needs  of  the
service at the time, and the applicant may  be  allowed  to  reenlist.
Therefore, in view of the above 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-
2004-02151  in  Executive  Session  on  21  October  2004  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
                       Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Jul 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 20 Aug 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 04.




                                        RICHARD A. PETERSON
                             Panel Chair