RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03205
INDEX CODE: 100.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 APRIL 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4A (Separated for hardship or
dependency reasons) be changed to a code that will allow him to reenter
military service.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When he enlisted in the Air Force it was his intent to make it a career.
He had to make a choice between his wife’s health and the Air Force. He
did not qualify for the Palace Chase or Place Front programs and thought
that requesting a discharge was his only option. For the past two years,
his wife has been off all medications except for the treatment of asthma.
Had the physicians correctly treated his wife, he would not have requested
a discharge and would still be in the Air Force. He has been working as a
civilian contractor for the US Army in Iraq. This experience has proven to
both him and his wife that should he be deployed, they would be able to
handle the stresses that come with being deployed.
In support of his request, applicant provides a personal statement, a copy
of his spouse’s statement, doctor’s statements with associated medical
documents and a copy of his early separation request with his DD Form 214.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 August 1999. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman having assumed that
grade effective and with a date of rank of 11 December 2001. He received
three Enlisted Performance Reports closing 15 January 2001, 15 January 2002
and 15 January 2003, in which the overall ratings were 5.
Applicant was honorably discharged on 31 October 2003, after serving 4
years, 2 months, and 20 days on active duty. An RE code 4A and a
separation code of KDB (Hardship) was assigned.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE finds no evidence that the applicant’s RE code was incorrect.
DPPAE states a review of the applicant’s military records reveals an
excellent history of duty performance. The applicant’s commander reported
the applicant as an excellent performer who made significant contributions
to the unit. DPPAE advises that if the Board decides to grant relief, they
recommend the RE code be changed to reflect “3K (Secretarial Authority).”
The DPPAE complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant on 17 November
2006 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice that would warrant a change to his RE code.
We agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of
primary responsibility that the RE code which was assigned at the time of
his separation accurately reflects his circumstances at the time of his
separation and evidence has not been provided that would lead us to believe
otherwise. We considered his overall quality of service and the events
which precipitated his discharge and his assertion that should he be
deployed; he and his wife would be able to handle the stresses that come
with deployment. However, based on the available evidence of record and in
the absence of evidence to show the record is in error, we do not find the
above consideration provides an adequate basis to change an RE code which
was proper and correct at the time it was assigned. In view of the above,
we find no 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-2006-03205
in Executive Session on 13 December 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. James W. Russell, III Panel Chair
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2006-
03205 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Sep 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 2 Nov 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jan 06.
JAMES W. RUSELL, III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03205
Had the physicians correctly treated his wife, he would not have requested a discharge and would still be in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE finds no evidence that the applicant’s RE code was incorrect. However, based on the available evidence of record and in the absence of evidence to show the record is in error, we do not find the above consideration provides an adequate basis to change an RE code...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02428
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02428 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 July 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 4A be changed so that he can qualify for enlistment into the Regular Air Force. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01750
After a thorough review of the available records, we found no evidence that the RE Code assigned at the time of the applicant’s separation was contrary to the governing regulation or unjust. 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 evidence of record supports the stated reasons for applicant’s separation and the corresponding RE code assigned in his...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03151 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he may reenlist in the military. Therefore, the commander felt that it would be in the best interest of the Air Force and the applicant that he separate from the service. On 25...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03288
DPPAE states the applicant’s records were reviewed along with statements she submitted, and based on the circumstances of her discharge find no evidence or injustice. Therefore, the RE code is correct and she has not submitted any evidence nor documentation from medical authorities that the condition no longer exists. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02374
The applicant enlisted in Aug 85 and his HOR was listed at that time. ___________________________________________________________________ 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. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02296
On 30 May 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s requests to change the narrative reason and authority for his separation and to change his RE code (Exhibit C). Applicant has not submitted evidence of any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge, nor provided facts warranting a change to the narrative reason for his separation or RE code. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02172
They also advise that upon applicant’s return to Beale AFB in January 2006, he, with the assistance of counsel, requested his squadron commander set aside the action. The AFPC/DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states that the commander acted within his authority and the applicant accepted the Article 15, UCMJ punishment; however, they did not make a recommendation, pointing out that if the Board finds the punishment harsh or finds irregularities surrounding the case and...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02729
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02729 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 MARCH 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to a disability discharge. He received an Honorable discharge, but he believes the Air Force should have done more to help him, “like a...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00766
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00766 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 SEPTEMBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Airman Performance Reports (APRs) for the periods ending 29 September 1988 and 6 June 1988 be voided and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to...