RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01145
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would
allow her to enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She enlisted in the Air Force in 1989 and after 13 days of active
service was medically discharged due to chronic back pain that existed
prior to service (EPTS). She has led a very active lifestyle since
her discharge including participation in fitness competitions and
bodybuilding. She wonders now whether or not she should have ever
been discharged. She notes her back bothered her in basic training
but not prior to nor after basic training.
In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided a personal
statement and a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty,
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 17 August 1989. On 7 September
1989, Wilford Hall Medical Center recommended she be discharged due to
low back pain and intermittent SI pain/post traumatic, that EPTS and
was not permanently aggravated by service. On or about 19 September
1989, a Medical Board concurred and recommended she be discharged from
the service by reason of physical disability which EPTS. Based on Air
Force policy at the time of her discharge, she was to be listed as
“previous service” and not, as under current guidelines, as “prior
service”. On 21 September 1989, she was discharged with an entry-
level discharge and a service characterization of uncharacterized.
She received an RE code of 4C, Failed to Meet Physical Standards for
Enlistment. She had served a total of one month and five days.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. DPPAE states that the RE code of 4C is
correct under the circumstances. However, should the applicant
complete and pass the physical standards at the Military Entrance and
Processing Station (MEPS) and be granted a waiver of the RE code by
the enlisting service component and/or medical authority she could
enter as “Non Prior Service” and be promoted to the appropriate
enlisted grade commensurate with her education and service component
guidelines.
DPPAE’s complete 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 6
August 2004 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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 of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
an error or injustice. She may apply for reenlistment into the
military service and, should she complete and pass the required
physical standards and be granted a waiver of her RE code, it is
possible she could enter as a non-prior sevice enlistee and be
considered for promotion based on her education. Therefore, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-01145 in Executive Session on 28 September 2004, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 Jul 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 04.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01984
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States, a personal statement, and extracts from his military personnel and medical records. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 21 Nov 03...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1998-01854
The Air Force Form 422, dated 21 Apr 1989, indicates removal from training and placement into casual status “as soon as administratively possible” due to adjustment disorder with an expiration date of 28 Apr 1989. They are the points of contact and waiver authority for personnel having prior service who desire to return to duty. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01903
The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed that he be discharged with an entry-level separation. The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 6 May 2002, he was issued an Reenlistment...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00785
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 at Exhibit C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the weight of the evidence does not clearly dictate a specific course of action at this time. Were his requests be granted and he reenter active duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01314
On that same date, the discharge authority approved the entry-level separation with service uncharacterized. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAE found that the RE code 4C, “separated - failure to meet physical standards for enlistment…,” is correct. 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01435
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01435 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to 1J so that she may reenlist in the Navy. The evidence of records supports the stated reasons for the applicant's separation for the Air Force and we are not persuaded by the evidence provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03167
He receive all back pay and allowances from 15 April 2000, the date he was released from active duty, until now. He requests a medical retirement from the Air National Guard (ANG). After more physical therapy he was sent back to the ANG for duty to see if he experienced any more problems.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01900
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01900 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not properly discharged from the Air Force. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01850
Although the discharge was proper, the applicant may now meet enlistment medical standards and the evidence warrants a change of RE code. The Consultant recommends approval but adds that a change of RE code by the Board is not equivalent to a finding of medically qualified for enlistment and does not guarantee acceptance by the Air Force for enlistment. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPAE advises the 4C RE code was applied in accordance with governing...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC2007-02179
It appears the specific reasons for this action was that she had back problems prior to entry on active duty but failed to disclose these problems until she was in BMT. In addition, SGPS states if the findings of the Board are in favor with the applicant, they can support her request to change her RE Code from “Fraudulent Entry” to "Not Medically Qualified.” The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. The applicant was discharged from the Air Force for...