RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04639 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His reentry (RE) code of 4L (Separated commissioning program eliminee OTS, AECP and so on) be changed to 1J (Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation) to allow immediate reenlistment. 2. His uncharacterized service characterization be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While serving with the Connecticut Air National Guard (ANG) he was accepted into the Air Force Academy. After a few weeks at the Academy, he requested to resign due to family issues. During his out processing he inquired about returning to the ANG to complete his enlistment. He was told that guardsmen were not sent back to their unit and that he could pursue reenlistment after his discharge from the Academy. When he tried to reenlist in the ANG, he was told he was ineligible to reenlist due to his RE code of 4L, which falls under an involuntary separation. He was surprised by this since he had voluntarily separated from the Academy. He believes he should have received an honorable discharge from the Academy due to his prior service and been allowed to complete his enlistment with ANG. His ANG recruiter contacted the Academy regarding his RE code and was told all cadets are discharged with such a code, regardless of whether it was voluntary or involuntary. He believes the cart blanche process the Academy uses to separate disenrolled cadets is unjust. He is requesting an RE code that would allow him to return to the ANG to complete his service commitment without the requirement of a higher headquarters level waiver, along with an honorable service characterization based on his prior service record. Lastly, an RE code needs to be established for individuals who voluntarily separate and have a service commitment to another component, and are allowed to transfer back, rather than incurring a break in service and bad RE code. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 25 Jan 11, the applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard (ANG) for a period of six years. He was honorably discharged on 26 Jun 13 and was credited with two years, five months and two days of service. On 27 Jun 13, the applicant entered the Air Force Academy. On 9 Jul 13, the applicant voluntarily requested to be disenrolled from the Academy. On 24 Jul 13, the applicant was disenrolled from the Academy and furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service characterization with an RE code of 4L (Separated commissioning program eliminee). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAFA/A1A recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. While AFI 36-3504 covers cadet disenrollments, it does not address a basic cadet reenlisting in the Air Force. AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, addresses the suitability for individuals reenlisting in the Air Force. The applicant was separated with the appropriate RE code in accordance with Air Force policy. The RE code 4L is the most applicable code given for an eliminee from the Air Force Academy. Furthermore, prior enlisted basic cadets who voluntarily resign will receive a characterization as determined by the disenrollment decision authority. The applicant received an honorable discharge from the ANG; however, his DD Form 214 only characterizes his service time as a basic cadet and not any previous service that he had already been separated. Lastly, each service has a waiver process for entry their service. A complete copy of the USAFA/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 18 Aug 14 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. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. While the applicant argues that the application of Air Force policy with respect to his uncharacterized service and Reentry (RE) code make him the victim of an injustice because he is unable to re-join the Air National Guard (ANG), we are not convinced that he is the victim of an injustice. In this respect, we note the applicant is eligible for enlistment, with a waiver, provided he is otherwise qualified. Whether or not the applicant is successful is entirely dependent on the needs of the service and/or component. Therefore, if the applicant is intent on re-affiliating with the ANG, his ability to do so is predicated on the availability of a vacancy for which he is qualified. In our view, the fact he will need a waiver to be considered does not constitute an injustice. Furthermore, we have been advised that the applicant’s DD Form 214 will be administratively corrected to reflect AFI 36-3208 as the Separation Authority in Block 25. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 not favorably considered. 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 members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04639 in Executive Session on 23 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Sep 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, USAFA/A1A, dated 28 Jul 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Aug 14. 2