RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02838
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 MAR 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The reenlistment eligibility (RE) code reflected on her DD Form 214 be
changed from “4L” to “R1.”
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She willingly volunteered for entry into the Air Force (AF) Officer
Candidate Program with no previous military background or experience.
She was unable to keep up with the AF culture and adapt to the officer
candidate school academics. She did not complete the program because
her grade point average (GPA) was 78 and she needed to maintain the
required GPA of 80.
She recently found out while trying to enlist into the AF Reserve that
the RE code was “4L” and is preventing her from serving her country.
The recruiter told her the RE code she received was given to
servicemembers for criminal or unfit personnel.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 25 July 1980,
as an airman first class (A1C) for a period of four years.
On 31 July 1980, the applicant entered the Officer Candidate Training
Program. The applicant failed her First, Second and Third
Consolidated Written Test (CWT). She had an incomplete on her written
letter and an unsatisfactory on her editing and communication security
tests. On 23 September 1980, the applicant was disenrolled from the
Officer Candidate Training Program. She was considered for reentry
into the program at a later date as an average candidate.
On 23 September 1980, the applicant submitted a request for separation
under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10 based on her
elimination from Officer Training School with an effective date of 24
September 1980. The applicant under the provisions of AFR 39-10 had
the option to request separation or remain on active duty for the
duration of her four-year enlistment.
On 23 September 1980, the applicant’s request for separation was
approved and she was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFR
39-10 with a separation code of “KHD” which indicates the
servicemember failed to complete commissioning program, and a RE code
of “4L” which reflects the applicant separated commissioning program
eliminee. She served two months of active duty service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE states the RE code the applicant received is appropriate.
The applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and the discharge
was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7
October 2005, for review and response. 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 of timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice. After careful
consideration of the circumstances of this case and the evidence
provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that the reenlistment
code she received upon separation from active duty was in error or
unjust. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not
been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant was
eliminated from officer candidate training and submitted a request to
be separated from the Air Force. The applicant’s separation request
was approved and she was discharged from the Air Force for failure to
complete a commissioning program, and assigned an RE code of 4L. No
evidence was provided which would lead us to believe the discharge was
improper or contrary to the directives under which it was affected, or
that the RE code was inappropriately assigned. Further, we note the
applicant’s reenlistment code is code that can be waived and depending
upon the needs of the service, the applicant may be allowed to
reenlist. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of
sufficient 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-
2005-02838 in Executive Session on 15 November 2005 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Sep 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Sep 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Oct 05.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03745
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAFA/DPY reviewed the application and stated, the member volunteered to leave; however, when a member is separated from a commissioning program the RE code 4L is used regardless of the underlying reasons behind the separation, as listed in AFI 36-2606. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02752
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 December 1982, for a period of four years in the grade of airman first class. On 19 Dec 86, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting her discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for an upgrade of her discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02140
Furthermore, HQ Air Reserve Personnel Center Directorate of Health Services, states the applicant’s reserve record does not show her to be on physical profile restricting her from participating. The applicant was allowed to participate for pay and points in the Air Force Reserve after her initial injury and also after being placed on temporary disability. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00345
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 1 Mar 05. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR dated 18 Mar 05. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-00345 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to , be corrected to...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01190
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01190 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and her narrative reason for separation be changed to misconduct-general. But, it is our opinion that a general (under other than honorable conditions)...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02754
The following AF Forms 418, Selective Reenlistment/Noncommissioned Officer Status Consideration, were on file in the master personnel record. She received an RE code of 2Y “A second-term or career airman considered but not selected for NCO status, or had vacated NCO status under AFR 39-13.” The complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 7 Oct 05, copies of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02587
A review of her record indicates she completed the service requirements for Reserve retired pay, however, there is no indication she ever applied for retirement. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02611
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. On 9 August 2005, the applicant completed an SGLV Form 8286A, Family Coverage Election, declining coverage. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFC recommended denial indicating Air Force leadership took adequate steps to inform all members of this new program and the applicant had adequate time to make an election decision.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02838
INDEX CODE: 131.10 BC-2004-02838 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00900
On 15 October 2003, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-2020 for a pattern of misconduct with an RE code of “4L” which denotes “Separated Commissioning Program Eliminee.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 10 AMDS/CC recommends the requested relief be denied. All cadets disenrolling from Air Force Academy are given this RE code. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...