RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00915 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of “4K” (medically disqualified for continued service; or, pending MEB/PEB) be changed to one that would allow him to reenlist. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His RE code is incorrect. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and a Psychological Evaluation from a civilian physician. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served from 10 March 2004 to 26 September 2006. The applicant was referred to an Informal Physical Disability Board (IPEB) on 10 August 2006, for Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, with Social and Industrial Impairment Considerable, Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) Without Permanent Service Aggravation. The IPEB recommended the applicant be discharged under other than Title 10 United States Code (EPTS). On 16 August 2006, the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendation of the IPEB. On 16 August 2006, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the recommended discharge and directed the applicant be discharged for physical disability due to an EPTS condition. The applicant was honorably discharged effective 26 September 2006 with an RE code of “4K” and a narrative reason for separation as “Disability Existed Prior to Service.” He served 2 years, 6 months, and 17 days on active duty. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD indicates the correct RE code for a member approved for a medical retirement or separation is “2Q” (personnel medically retired or discharged). After the Board’s action, the applicant’s RE code will be corrected by the appropriate office. The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s RE code should have been changed to “2Q.” As such, his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, will be corrected to reflect the RE code “2Q” unless the Board directs otherwise. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: During the time of his recommended discharge, he was confused and had no guidance. He is requesting the Board give him the opportunity to serve his country in order for him to support his family. He does not suffer from depression and he requests he be given another chance. The applicant’s complete rebuttal, with attachment, is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ 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 that would warrant a change to the applicant’s RE code to allow him to reenlist. We note the applicant’s submission of a current evaluation from a civilian psychologist indicating he is symptom free; however, while he may be currently symptom free, it does not preclude his symptoms from returning due to the rigors of military service. We also note the Air Force offices of primary responsibility indicate the appropriate RE code that should have been assigned at the time of the applicant’s separation is “2Q,” based on his medical separation due to a disability that existed prior to service; they will administratively correct his record to reflect the correct RE code. We concur with this correction. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. _________________________________________________________________ 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-2010-00915 in Executive Session on 10 November 2010 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2010-00915 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Mar 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 19 Mar 10. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 27 Apr 10. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Jun 10. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Jul 10, w/atch.