RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01987 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her reentry (RE) code of 4H, which denotes “Serving suspended 
punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military 
Justice (UCMJ)” be changed. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Her RE code is incorrect. She had financial problems towards the 
end of her enlistment. Her supervisor requested to see a copy of 
her credit report, stating that the first sergeant wanted to 
review it. She did not feel comfortable with releasing her 
credit report. Within a few weeks, she was given the option of an 
early separation from the Air Force or receive a dishonorable 
discharge. She choose the early separation not knowing she would 
receive a 4H RE code. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, copies of character reference letters, her DD Form 
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; DD 
Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed 
Forces of the United States; letters recommendation, and extracts 
from her master personnel record. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 23 August 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force. 

 

On 22 June 2004, the applicant was notified by his commander of 
his intent to impose punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ. 
The reason for the action was she failed to obey a lawful order 
by wrongfully taking leave outside the local area without 
notifying her supervisor. The applicant acknowledged receipt of 
the action and waived her right to demand trial by court-martial. 
On 29 April 2004, the commander found the applicant committed the 


offense alleged and imposed punishment consisting of a reprimand 
and a suspended reduction to the grade of airman first class. 
The applicant elected not to appeal the punishment. 

 

On 19 August 2004, the applicant was honorably discharged with a 
separation code of JBK, which denotes “Air Force Rollback 
program” and a RE code of 4H. She served 3 years, 11 months and 
27 days of total active duty service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant has not 
provided any evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the 
change to her discharge characterization. Based on the 
documentation in her master personnel records, the discharge to 
include her characterization of service was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge manual 
and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s RE 
code of 4H is the only description applicable for members serving 
a suspended Article 15 punishment. 

 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to applicant on 
17 December 2010 for review and response. As of this date, no 
response has been received by this office (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 error or injustice. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits; 


however, 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 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 his request. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-01987 in Executive Session on 15 February 2011, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

Panel Chair 

Member 

Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 May 2011, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 10 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 15 Nov 10 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair