RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2000-03350
INDEX NUMBER: 100.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 4G be changed to 1A, to
allow him to reenter the military.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The RE code he received was “bad” and is preventing his return to
military service.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided his personal
statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, Individual RIP, and his last
three Enlisted Performance Reports (EPR).
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 Apr 90, in the
grade of airman (E-1), for a period of six years. He served on
continuous active duty and entered his last enlistment on 15 Aug
95.
His highest grade held was staff sergeant (E-5).
Applicant’s Enlistment Performance Report (EPR) profile follows:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
15 Nov 95 5
5 Mar 97 5
13 Apr 98 3
13 Apr 99 5
Applicant was permanently decertified from the Personnel
Reliability Program (PRP) on 28 Oct 97. The reason cited for the
decertification was the mental health clinic identified that the
applicant had a poor attitude toward his job and the purpose of
PRP. After further analysis he was diagnosed with depression on
24 Oct 97, and recommended for permanent decertification by mental
health.
On 16 Dec 97, applicant was advised his promotion to staff sergeant
was being withheld due to administrative proceedings which led to
his permanent decertification from the PRP and AFSC removal. He
subsequently was promoted to staff sergeant on 1 Jan 98.
On 27 Aug 98, applicant acknowledged receipt of notification that
his application for retraining into AFSC 1N011 (Intelligence Career
Field) was cancelled.
On that same date, he acknowledged official notification that his
voluntary retraining into AFSC 3A011 (Information Management) had
been approved, with retraining effective 20 Sep 98.
Applicant served in the following AFSCs:
3P051 – Security Police Journeyman, 8 yrs, 4 mos.
3A031 – Information Management Apprentice, 9 mos
On 14 Aug 99, he was honorably discharged, under the provisions of
AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service), and was issued
an RE code of 4G (No AFSC awarded that is commensurate with grade).
He was credited with 9 years, 3 months, and 2 days of active duty
service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied, and states, in
part, that they did not find an error in the application of his RE
code. The applicant was discharged with a skill level of “3” in
the Information Management career field. The skill level was not
commensurate with his grade of E-5. The RE code accurately
reflects the conditions of his record at the time of his discharge.
The respective military recruiter can waive the RE code as a
condition of his enlistment. The applicant did not provide
evidence he tried to pursue this administrative remedy.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant contends that he did not realize he had been reassigned
to AFSC 3A031, Information Management. When he lost his Security
Forces AFSC, he was told that he did not have an AFSC. He was
never given the opportunity, agreed to, nor informed that he was
“reassigned” as an IM specialist.
Applicant’s response to Air Force evaluation is at 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. At the time a
member is separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE
Code predicated upon the quality of their service and the
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. After
careful consideration of the evidence provided, we are not
persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or that
an upgrade of the RE code is warranted. Furthermore, we note that
the applicant’s current RE code of 4G is a code that can be waived
for prior service enlistment consideration, provided he meets all
other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service
program, and depending on the needs of the service. In view of the
foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2000-
03350 in Executive Session on 18 March 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Dec 03
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 23 Jan 04
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jan 04
Exhibit E Letter, Applicant, dated 9 Feb 04
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
_________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 8 September 1999, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 36-3208, paragraph 1.2 (Secretarial Authority) with a separation code of JFF and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 3K. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 27 Apr 01. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Panel Chair AFBCMR...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01054
There is no evidence of error or injustice in his records; nor, did he provide any evidence to support a change to his RE code. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOS recommends denying the applicants request to change his separation code. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing; nor, did he provide any facts warranting a change to his separation code.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2009 01054
There is no evidence of error or injustice in his records; nor, did he provide any evidence to support a change to his RE code. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOS recommends denying the applicants request to change his separation code. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing; nor, did he provide any facts warranting a change to his separation code.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02718
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02718 INDEX CODES: 100.05, 111.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 Mar 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: By amendment, his promotion eligibility be reinstated so his test scores for the 03E6 cycle can be graded; he receive promotion consideration for cycle 04E6; his training status code...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-00561
On 4 Oct 05, the applicant’s commander notified her via an AF Form 286A, “Notification of Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reliability Program Permanent Decertification/Disqualification Action,” he was concurring with the recommendation of the medical authority to permanently decertify her from the PRP. Air Force Form 418, dated 29 Sep 04, which indicates she was selected for reenlistment just 13 months prior to the AF Form 418 dated 28 Oct 05 denying her reenlistment. After reviewing the...
A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) reviewed his condition on 13 Jul 88 and recommended he be returned to duty. A letter from the squadron section commander, dated 11 Jan 89, indicated that the applicant could not be used in his current AFSC with his medical problems and cross training was recommended. In a letter dated 24 Jan 91, the Chief, Physical Therapy, supported applicant's desire to be retained as an active duty member and cross trained to a less strenuous career field.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02289
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit C) _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the requested relief be denied. The complete AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02099
In a rebuttal to the Air Force evaluation, applicant now requests that she be reinstated to active duty in the Air Force, promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (TSgt) (E-6) and allowed to cross train into the Paralegal career field she was approved for prior to her discharge. The applicant’s complete statement is at Exhibit L. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE recommends that the applicant’s RE code be changed to “3K,”...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02146
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice regarding the contested EPR. He believes the additional information he provides will show how the nuclear weapons incident on 30 Aug 07 itself solely led to his lower rating in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01211
The initial DD Form 214 issued in conjunction with the applicant’s 15 Jul 91 separation reflected the narrative reason for separation as “Return from overseas within 30 days of expiration term of service,” with separation code “K14,” and RE Code 4D (Grade is senior airman and member has completed at least nine years of total active service and had not yet been selected for staff sergeant). At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, he/she is furnished an RE code predicated upon...