RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02117 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, Block 27, Reentry Code be changed from 4L, which denotes 
“Separated commissioning program eliminee (OTS, AECP, and so 
on)” to a code suitable for reentry into the armed services as a 
pilot. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. He voluntarily separated from the Air Force Academy with a 
recommendation for future service from his commanding officer; 
however, the RE code 4L disqualifies him for reentry. 

 

2. Cadets who leave the academy automatically receive a RE code 
of 4L. It is an injustice because it leads recruiters to 
believe he is ineligible for future service, even though there 
is no reason he should not be eligible. 

 

3. The issue was discovered after he applied, interviewed, and 
was selected as an alternate for a pilot position in the Air 
National Guard (ANG). The personnel office requested he get his 
RE code changed. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214; USAFA Form 34, Cadet Separation Clearance/Referral, 
and other documents in support of his request. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 29 Jun 06, the applicant entered the United States Air Force 
Academy (USAFA) as an officer trainee. He was discharged on 
20 Jun 08, after serving 1 year, 11 months and 23 days in the 
USAFA. 

 

 


The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Forces, which is attached at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

USAFA/A1A recommends denial. AIA states changing the 
applicant’s RE code to anything other than 4L would conflict 
with current Department of Defense (DoD) and Air Force guidance. 
The only RE code that applies, by verbiage alone is “separated 
commissioning program eliminee (OTS, AECP, and so on).” Since 
the Air Force Academy is a commissioning program, this code is 
appropriate regardless of the reason for separation. 

 

Reenlistment codes are used DoD-wide to facilitate reenlistment 
in the armed forces. Each accession source has documentation 
that can be used to waive the 4L RE code and allow reentry. Air 
Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2012, Record of Disenrollment from 
Officer Candidate-Type Training--DD Form 785 mandates that 
military services use the DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment 
from Officer Candidate-Type Training to record information on 
individuals disenrolled from an officer candidate training 
program. This form provides a recommendation for future officer 
training. 

 

The complete A1A 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 23 Sep 11 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received a 
response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our 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 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 issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is again 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-2011-02117 in Executive Session on 10 Apr 12, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

Member 

 Member 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. USAFA/A1A, Letter, dated 30 Jun 11. 

 Exhibit C. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 23 Sep 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair