RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03361
							INDEX CODE 100.06
	 						COUNSEL:  None

							HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that allows enlistment in the Reserves.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served his full four-year term. He elected to help close his base down. When he left, there was no real out-processing department left. He was out-processed with the remaining individuals in his squadron and believes he was given an incorrect RE code. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 Mar 89 and served at XXXXXX AFB, TX as a bomber ground crew member.

XXXXX Mental Health Clinic (MHC) medical entries reflect the commander referred the applicant to the clinic for marital problems. The applicant’s certification in the Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) was temporarily suspended on 10 Dec 91. A 16 Mar 92 MHC entry reported the applicant had not attended group sessions since 10 Feb 92. His PRP certification was again pulled on 9 Apr 92 due to lack of concentration and reported difficulties with PRP duties. The psychiatrist felt that, rather than a major mental disorder, the applicant’s marginal motivation and difficulty adjusting to night shift work appeared to be factors. He recommended permanent decertification.

In May 92, the commander permanently decertified the applicant from the PRP based on the recommendation from the MHC that, although he did not suffer any specific disorder, the applicant’s 
personality traits, preoccupation with personal problems, difficulty in adjusting to shift changes, and marginal motivation had not improved with treatment.

On 4 Aug 92, the applicant did not show for a scheduled command-directed MHC evaluation. He continued not to attend group therapy sessions. On 6 Aug 92, in a command-directed evaluation, the psychiatrist noted the commander reported the applicant’s performance much improved over the last six weeks and that he wanted to return the applicant to flight line duties but not to the PRP. The applicant related he was doing well, and the psychiatrist found no mental health reason to preclude the applicant’s return to the flight line, at the commander’s discretion.

A 6 Jan 93 Report of Individual Person (RIP) indicated the applicant was ineligible for promotion because he was denied reenlistment, effective Jul 92.

On 5 Mar 93, he was honorably discharged in the grade of senior airman after four years of active service. His narrative reason for discharge was “Involuntary expiration of term of service” and his RE code was “2X” (First, second or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)). 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

HQ AFPC/DPPAE confirms the applicant’s RE code is correct. He has not provided any documentation that supports changing his RE code. Waivers of RE codes for enlistment are considered and approval based on the needs of the respective military service and recruiting initiatives at the time of the enlistment inquiry.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRSP notes the applicant was discharged involuntarily upon expiration of term of service based on his commander denying him reenlistment eligibility. The reduction in force (RIF) or base closure had no bearing on the applicant’s RE code, which was based on his not being selected for reenlistment under the SRP. DPPRSP believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discharge authority’s discretion. The applicant has not substantiated any errors or injustices and his appeal should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF EVALUATION: 

The applicant provided an undated personal statement (mailed 25 Mar 04), an unsigned supporting statement, a 1992 mental health evaluation, and certificates. He contends his problems were caused by poor marital choices, which led to some temporary problems in 1992.  He only followed suggestions/orders and did not realize the ramifications of these actions.

A complete copy of the rebuttal, with attachments, 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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant amending the applicant’s RE code. Based on his rebuttal submission, it appears his military performance suffered after he made an unfortunate marriage at a young age. However, the 7 Aug 1992 mental health evaluation disclosed that the applicant had subsequently improved his attitude and performance, and no longer suffered from symptoms of depression. Further, the psychiatrist concluded the applicant had life circumstances and marital problems, not a mental disorder, and was worldwide qualified. The applicant appears to have matured and adjusted following a temporary stressful situation. Therefore, the Board is persuaded he should be afforded the opportunity to apply for a waiver to reenlist. In this respect, an RE code from the “3” series would permit the applicant to apply for enlistment and, should he have the desirable skills and is otherwise acceptable, the Reserves may elect to waive his ineligibility and allow him to reenlist.  Whether or not he is successful will depend on the needs of the service, and the Board’s recommendation in no way guarantees he will be allowed to reenter the armed services. Therefore, the majority of the Board recommends his reenlistment code be changed to “3K” (Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the AFBCMR when no other RE code applies or is appropriate).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, in conjunction with his honorable discharge on 5 March 1993, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K,” rather than “2X.”
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 23 March and 6 April 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-03361 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Dec 03.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Dec 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.

								

AFBCMR BC-2003-03361

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to    , be corrected to show that, in conjunction with his honorable discharge on 5 March 1993, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K,” rather than “2X.”