RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02539
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was honorably discharged from the Air Force due to hardship reasons
associated with a divorce. He was informed by a recruiter that the 4A code
is for medical reasons. He did not have then and does not have any medical
reasons now that would hinder him from reenlisting or performing any job.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 214,
Certificate for Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on September 1990. On 3
March 1983, his commander considered and denied his reenlistment. On 26
February 1993, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 for
hardship reasons and was issued an honorable discharge. He received a
separation designator code of KDB and a RE code of 4A “Separated for
Hardship or Dependency Reasons”. He served 2 years, 4 months, and 19 days
on active duty.
After reviewing the applicable instruction, AFI 36-2606, it appears the RE
code issued is accurate.
_________________________________________________________________
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 waive the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an error or injustice. At the time members are separated from
the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of
their service and circumstances of their separation. The assigned code
reflects the Air Force’s position regarding whether or not, or under what
circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist. The evidence
of record supports the Air Force’s stated reasons for applicant’s
separation. We noted the great changes in the applicant’s life, however,
we are not persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or
that a correction of the RE code is warranted. Therefore, in the absence
of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application. We note that the RE code
of “4A” is a waiverable code; therefore, we suggest that the applicant
contact his local recruiter concerning his reaffiliation to the military.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number BC-2003-02539
in Executive Session on 17 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jul 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02770
On 2 Jul 98, applicant requested a hardship discharge based on family difficulties. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. Additionally, we note the assigned RE code of 4A is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided applicant meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program, and depending on...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03104
He received a separation designator code of JBK and a RE code of 2X, “First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP”. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03104
He received a separation designator code of JBK and a RE code of 2X, “First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP”. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02795
The reason for this action was that on 1 and 6 December 2001 he failed to refrain from providing alcohol for a person under age 21, and received an Article 15 with a $375 forfeiture of pay. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC2003-02377A4th
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to indicate any error or injustice occurred during his processing through the Disability Evaluation System (DES), or that the RE code is incorrect. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Complete copies of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03451
He had completed a total of 9 years and 27 days and was serving in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) at the time of discharge. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02838
In support of applicant’s appeal, he submitted a personal statement; an email, dated 19 May 03, from his military personnel flight to 4th AF/DPM concerning contractual errors; Reserve Order P- 045 reflecting promotion to staff sergeant, effective 1 Jul 91; copies of a 1 Sep 91 training certificate, a Report of Individual Personnel (RIP), dated 31 Jul 91, and a DD Form 2AF (Reserve) ID Card issued 17 Aug 91, all reflecting the rank of staff sergeant; copies of DD Form 214, Certificate of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02771
On 4 December 2000, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending a discharge for a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions and recommended a general discharge. He received an Article 15 on 14 November 2000 for disorderly conduct, and Record of Individual Counseling (ROC), 29 September 2000, for failure to go to appointed place of duty on time and 31 August 2000, for failure to keep dormitory room in inspection order. At the time members are separated from the Air Force,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | bc-2003-02406
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Although the RE code assigned at the time of her separation was accurate, we believe the applicant should be provided the opportunity to apply for enlistment in the armed services. DAVID C. VAN GASBECK Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2003-02406 INDEX CODE: 112.00 MEMORANDUM...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02194
On 2 June 2003, the applicant requested that the finance center stop the SBP. Furthermore, the applicant failed to respond to their 7 July 2003 letter requesting he obtain a notarized statement completed by his wife in which she acknowledges retired pay ceases when the applicant dies, that she is currently eligible to receive an annuity valued at approximately $774 per month (after the age of 62, no less than $492), and approval of this request would result in her receiving no...