RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03407 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code be changed to allow him to reenter the military. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was discharged with an RE code of “4C” (Failure to meet physical standards for enlistment) because of his condition of having migraine headaches. He has provided a letter from his civilian physician indicating he no longer suffers from this condition. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and a statement from his 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 on active duty from 10 June 2007 to 14 September 2007. On 11 September 2007, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend the applicant for an entry-level separation for fraudulent enlistment under the provisions of Air Force Policy Directive 36-32 and Air Force Instruction 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section C. The commander indicated the reason for his recommendation was that he received a medical narrative summary on the applicant, dated 7 September 2007, that indentified the applicant as not meeting minimum medical standards to enlist. The applicant acknowledged receipt of his commander’s intent and waived his right to consult counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. After the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate found the case to be legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized, entry-level separation. The applicant was discharged with an entry-level separation, effective 14 September 2007, in the grade of airman basic (E-1), after serving 2 months and 14 days on active duty. His DD Form 214 reflects his RE code as “4C” and a narrative reason for separation as “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards.” ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS supports changing the applicant’s RE code to allow him to reapply to re-enter military service. SGPS states the applicant failed to disclose his headache history during his accession physical. When his condition was discovered during basic training, the applicant chose not to pursue a waiver review. SGPS finds that at the time of the applicant’s separation, the process was completed in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures; however, his current medical history indicates he currently meets medical criteria for military duty. The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denying the applicant’s request for a reenlistment eligible RE code. However, the RE code of “4C” reflected on his DD Form 214, is in error. The correct RE Code is “2C” (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service). The RE code of “2C” applies to all entry-level separations without characterization of service regardless of whether the discharge is voluntary or involuntary. DPSOA indicates that if the Board’s decision is to change the applicant’s RE code, the only other option would be “3K” (Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or AFBCMR when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is appropriate). This code would still require a waiver from Recruiting Services. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 December 2011, 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 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 an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case to include the differing opinions of the Air Force evaluators. However, the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DPSOA to change the applicant’s RE code from “4C” to “2C,” since it is the required RE code based on the applicant’s entry level separation with uncharacterized of service. 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-2011-03407 in Executive Session on 26 April 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03407: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 16 Aug 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 18 Oct 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 28 Nov 11. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 11.