RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01203 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His 4K (Medically disqualified for continued service, or the 
airman is pending evaluation by a Medical Evaluation 
Board/Physical Evaluation Board (MEB/PEB)) reentry (RE) code be 
changed to allow him to reenlist. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did not realize his RE code would not allow him to reenlist. 
He desires to enlist into the National Guard in order to serve 
his state and country. 

 

In support of his request, applicant provides a copy of his DD 
Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, a copy of a letter from 
AFPC/DPPRY, and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
or Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 May 95. He 
served in the grade of senior airman (E-4), having assumed that 
grade effective and with a date of rank of 3 May 98. On 9 Apr 
99, the applicant was referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation 
Board (IPEB) for epilepsy which was incurred while on active 
duty. On 20 Apr 99, he met the IPEB for a seizure disorder, he 
was found unfit for duty and recommended for discharge with 
severance pay at a 10 percent disability rating. The applicant 
agreed to the findings of the IPEB and waived his right to a 
formal PEB hearing. On 2 Jul 99, he was honorably discharged 
with severance pay. He served on active duty for 4 years and 
2 months. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 


 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states that there is no 
evidence to support his request. DPSOA notes a waiver of the 
“2Q” RE code would be more appropriate than changing the 
applicant’s DD Form 214. The DD Form 214 reflects the status of 
the applicant at the time of his discharge and is not to be 
changed after the discharge effective date. 

 

The DPSOA complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the applicant’s RE code 
should have been reflected as “2Q” versus “4K” at the time of his 
discharge. DPSD amended the DD Form 214 and his records now 
reflect the correct RE code; the “2Q” RE code is the right code 
for personnel who are medically retired or separated from the Air 
Force. 

 

The DPSD complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 Aug 09 for review and comment within 30 days. 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We note 
AFPC/DPSD has verified and amended the applicant’s DD Form 214 to 
reflect the RE code appropriate at the time of his discharge. 
However, other than what has already been corrected, we see no 
evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in 
his RE code. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error 
or injustice. Accordingly, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 


will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2009-01203 in Executive Session on 3 Nov 09, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Mar 09, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 7 May 09. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 2 Jun 09. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Aug 09. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair