RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04116 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 _________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reentry (RE) code of 4K (medically disqualified for 
continued service; or pending evaluation by medical evaluation 
board/physical evaluation board) be revised to allow him reentry 
into military service. 

 

 ___________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged for asthma which was based on unsubstantiated 
medical evidence. A further medical evaluation disclosed the 
cause of his wheezing on exertion was due to allergic rhinitis. 

 

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

 

 __________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force on 24 March 2009. 

 

On 30 March 2011, the applicant was diagnosed with wheezing and 
was referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). 

 

On 26 April 2011, the IPEB diagnosed the applicant with wheezing 
on exertion and recommended he be discharged for physical 
disability with a combined compensable disability rating of ten 
percent. 

 

On 24 June 2011, the applicant accepted the findings of the 
IPEB, thereby waiving his right to a formal hearing. 

 

On 11 July 2011, the Secretary of the Air Force found the 
applicant unfit for continued military service and directed his 
honorable discharge with entitlement to severance pay. 

 

On 30 October 2011, the applicant was furnished an honorable 
discharge with a narrative reason for separation of “Disability, 
Severance Pay, Non Combat” and an RE code of 4K (medically 
disqualified for continued service; or pending evaluation by 



medical evaluation board/physical evaluation board). He was 
credited with 2 years, 7 months and 7 days of total active 
service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

 ___________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request for a 
change to his RE code that would allow him to reenlist. The 
applicant erroneously received a RE Code of 4K. However, he 
should have been issued an RE code of 2Q (Personnel medically 
retired or discharged) in conjunction with his discharge. 
Although the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, will be administratively corrected 
to reflect the correct RE Code, it will not result in his 
ability to reenlist. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/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 31 March 2013 for review and comment within 30 
days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit D). 

 

 ___________________________________________________________ 

 

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 an error or injustice warranting 
correcting the applicant’s record to allow him to reenlist. We 
took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging 
the merits of the case; however, other than the erroneously 
issued RE code of 4K that has been administratively corrected by 
AFPC/DPSOR to reflect 2Q, we find no evidence of an error or 
injustice that occurred during the discharge process. Based on 
the evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s disability 
discharge was carried out in accordance with the prescribing 
directives and the applicant has provided no evidence whatsoever 
to indicate that he should have been issued an RE code that 



would allow him to reenlist. Therefore, in view of the above 
and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 
to recommend favorable consideration of the relief requested. 

 

 ___________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-04116 in Executive Session on 2 May 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 August 2012, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 8 November 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 March 2013.