Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00424
Original file (BC-2013-00424.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
				RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
		AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:					DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00424
							COUNSEL:  NONE
  							HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reentry (RE) Code of 4E which denotes “4 year enlistee and grade is A1C (with less than 12 months TIG) or below and Airmen completed 31 or more months, if a FTA; or 6 year Enlistee and grade is below SrA and has completed 55 or more months, if a FTA; or second Term/career Airmen and grade is A1C or below and has less than 16 years of TAFMS” be changed to allow his enlistment in the Armed Forces.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The RE code barring him from reentry into the Armed Forces is excessively harsh.  He served his Article 15 punishment, to include extra duty, anger management, marriage counseling and a reduction in grade.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of AF Form 293, Application for Review of Discharge and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 13 July 2004, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force.  On 12 July 2008, he was discharged with an honorable character of service.

In October 2007, the applicant received an Article 15 for physically assaulting his wife.  The Article 15 punishment included a demotion to the grade of airman first class (E-3) with a date of rank of 11 October 2007.  

________________________________________________________________



AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  DPSOA states there is no documentation to support there was an error or injustice.  The applicant was demoted based on his own actions.  His correct RE code is 4E in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2601, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force.  If the applicant were otherwise eligible for reentry, it would be more appropriate for RE code 4E to be waived by recruiting services than changed from the correct code.  Every other member of the Air Force that does not meet the appropriate grade for their time in service separates with a 4E or 4D RE code depending on their rank.  Since the RE Code 4E applied to the applicant while he was on active duty and was appropriate at the time of separation, it would not make sense to change his RE code.

The complete DPSOA 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 8 March 2013 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has not received a response. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 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 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-2013-00424 in Executive Session on 17 September 2013 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Nov 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 1 Mar 2013.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Mar 2013




																Panel Chair












Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01640

    Original file (BC 2014 01640.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant was demoted based on his own action of underage drinking and again doing the same while still serving the suspended punishment for his first offense. We took notice of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04395

    Original file (BC-2010-04395.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Therefore, we believe the applicant’s records should be corrected as indicated below. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02923

    Original file (BC-2012-02923.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02923 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Re-entry (RE) code of 4E, Ineligible Due to Insufficient Grade – Grade is A1C or Below, on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty be changed or upgraded to 3B, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration Decision...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05199

    Original file (BC 2013 05199.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was serving in the grade of A1C at the time of his discharge with 31 months or more Time in Service (TIS). As a result, he was not eligible to reenlist and had to separate due to his grade of A1C and TIS. A complete copy of the DPSOA 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 14 Feb 14 for review and comment within...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02791

    Original file (BC-2012-02791.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02791 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________ ________________________________________ __________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code of 4E (Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months (55 months for a 6- year enlistees)), be changed so that he can be eligible to rejoin the military service. ___________...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02916

    Original file (BC-2012-02916.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02916 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of “4E” (Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months (55 months for a 6- year enlistees), if a first-term airman; or, grade is airman first class or below and the airman is a second-term or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01916

    Original file (BC-2013-01916.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the Board grants his request, he be returned to active duty. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of his requests to extend his enlistment to make him eligible to reenlist. In the applicant’s case, he would not be eligible for promotion to the grade of SrA until 6 Jun 2016.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02884

    Original file (BC-2010-02884.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02884 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 4E (Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months (55 months for 6-year enlistees), if a first-term airman; or, grade is airman first class or below and the airman is a second-term or career...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00752

    Original file (BC-2008-00752.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received an Article 15 and while he was on leave his commander received a notice to separate airmen with bad records under the Force Shaping program. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA states the applicant was not serving suspended punishment under Article 15, UCMJ at the time of his release. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01250

    Original file (BC-2013-01250.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Completion of the RTDP does not guarantee return to duty, it only requires airmen returned to duty be allowed to serve at least one year before separation. While the applicant successfully completed the RTDP, there was no error or injustice in her case. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of actionable material error or injustice; that the...