RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01406 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her reentry (RE) code, separation code, and narrative reason for 
separation be changed to allow her to reenter active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She is trying to return to active duty; however, her RE code and 
narrative reason for separation is preventing her from doing so. 
She has long believed her RE code was inappropriate. During her 
last six months in the military, her chain of command was subject 
to an intense Inspector General (IG) investigation due to her 
claim of “reprisal for using her chain of command.” Although the 
IG did not find in favor of her claim, she continues to stand by 
her claim even after she was discharged. 

 

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of a DD 
Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed 
Forces of the United States; her DD Form 214, Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty; numerous performance 
reports; IG investigation documentation; several Letters of 
Reprimand (LORs); character references; letters and certificates 
of appreciation; congressional correspondence; unit 
correspondence; training/education correspondence; and several 
letters of support. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained 
in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air 
Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in 
the Record of Proceedings. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denying the applicant’s request to change 
her RE code. DPSOA states the RE code “2C”is required based on 
the applicant’s involuntary discharge with an honorable 
characterization of service. The applicant requests the RE code 
“1J” (eligible to reenlist, but elects separation); however, she 
cannot be awarded the RE code “1J” as she was not selected for 
reenlistment by her commander under the Selective Reenlistment 
Program (SRP). 

 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states they found no 
evidence of an error or injustice in the processing of the 
discharge action, nor did the applicant submit any such evidence. 
The narrative reason for separation and reentry code was properly 
established based on the applicant’s involuntary discharge and 
honorable service characterization. Based on the documentation 
on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was 
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of 
the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant 
on 5 November 2010, 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an injustice. Even though the 
applicant has provided no evidence to show that her discharge was 
improper or not in compliance with the appropriate regulations, 
it is our opinion that relief is warranted in this particular 
case. In this regard, we note the applicant contends her 
discharge codes were based on the last six months of her nearly 
eight years of active duty after she made protected disclosures 
to the group commander. Although the IG did not find in favor of 
the applicant’s claim of reprisal, we believe there is sufficient 
evidence to conclude that her difficulties were contributed to by 


a personality conflict with her supervisor. In that regard, we 
note the IG Report indicates the applicant and her supervisor had 
numerous confrontations which were exacerbated by the supervisor 
giving work assignments directly to other office staff members 
without going through the applicant, even though she was the 
section Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge. These actions 
contributed to an unprofessional office atmosphere. In view of 
this; we believe any doubt in this case should be resolved in 
favor of the applicant. Based on the aforementioned, the Board 
believes her RE code, separation code, and narrative reason for 
separation should be changed to waiverable codes in the interest 
of equity and justice. Therefore, the Board recommends her 
records be corrected to the extent indicated below. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 9 June 1997, 
she was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 
1.2 (Secretarial Authority), with a Separation Program Designator 
code of “KFF, a narrative reason for separation of “Secretarial 
Authority” and a Reentry Code of “3K.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-
2010-01406 in Executive Session on 6 January 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Vice Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-
01406 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Apr 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 2 Jun 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 4 Oct 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Nov 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Vice Chair