RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01899 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Reentry (RE) Code of 4C (Failed Medical/Physical Procurement 
Standards) be changed so he can enlist in the Navy or claim 
aggravation for his condition to get Department of Veteran 
Affairs assistance. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was unjustly given an Erroneous Enlistment Discharge due to a 
previously existing medical issue which was well documented on 
his initial “report of medical history,” and was waived. He did 
not try to hide the issue. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, report of medical history, excerpts from his separation 
package, and DD Form 293, Application for the Review of 
Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered the Air Force on 11 Aug 99. 

 

On 27 Aug 99, the applicant’s commander notified him she was 
recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for erroneous 
enlistment. The reason for the action was that his medical 
narrative summary, dated 18 Aug 99, revealed the applicant did 
not meet minimum medical standards to enlist. He should not 
have been allowed to join the Air Force because of atrophy in 
his right testicle and a painful left vericocele. The applicant 
acknowledged receipt, and waived his right to counsel and to 
submit a statement on his own behalf. 

 

On 30 Aug 99, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
discharged with an Entry Level Separation for Erroneous 
Enlistment with uncharacterized service. 


On 1 Sep 99, the applicant was furnished a Entry Level 
Separation with uncharacterized service, with a Narrative Reason 
for Separation of “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement 
Standards,” and an RE Code of 4C, and he was credited with 21 
days of total active service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility (OPR) which are attached at Exhibits C 
and D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change 
his RE code. The applicant underwent surgery to correct torsion 
of his right testicle in 1993, apparently with good result. He 
entered the Air Force on 11 Aug 99, and started basic training. 
On 16 Aug 99, he was seen at Reid Clinic for sharp left lower 
abdomen and scrotum pain, diagnosed as a painful left 
varicocele, which rendered him unable to complete training and 
disqualified him for military duty. The separation was carried 
out in accordance with established policy and administrative 
procedures. As the condition existed prior to entry and became 
symptomatic during training, his RE code should not be changed. 

 

A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. Although the applicant states his 
medical condition was well documented, his medical condition 
does not meet Air Force assessment standards. The applicant’s 
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive 
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the 
discretion of the discharge authority. In accordance with DoD 
and Air Force guidance on entry-level separations, the 
applicant’s “uncharacterized” character of service which 
resulted in an RE Code of 4C is correct. Airmen are given 
entry-level separation with uncharacterized service when 
separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous 
active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined it 
would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize a 
member’s limited service when separation is initiated within the 
first 180 days of active service. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 28 Jun 12 for review and comment within 30 days. 


As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(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 an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case. However, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility (OPRs) and adopt their rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error 
or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
applicant was denied without a personal appearance; and the 
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of 
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with the 
application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-01899 in Executive Session on 17 Jan 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

 

 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-01899 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 May 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 11 Jun 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 14 Jun 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair